VAR should be first to go in Premiership spring clean

Yet this was the apparent conclusion to the latest VAR independent panel review by the Scottish FA. The governing body's confirmatory statement yesterday regarding its latest findings on “key match incidents” could be summarised as: yes, we made a few mistakes, but the percentage of correct decisions made by referees rose.

The VAR monitor is tested (Image: SNS)

READ MORE: VAR review reveals number of incorrect Scottish Premiership decisions

But dig a little deeper into the six paragraphs of “data” summarised in this statement and you will be left with more questions than a married couple during a cost-of-living crisis; the one our 12 Premiership clubs need to ask themselves at the end of the current campaign, meanwhile, is this: is the £1.2m outlay for this particular video streaming platform really necessary?

“Following the conclusion of the pre-split SPFL Premiership fixtures in the 2023/24 season, the VAR Independent Review Panel (IRP) have met to consider Key Match Incidents (KMIs),” the statement triumphantly begins. If we pick away at the jargon, this refers to the first 33 groups of fixtures of the Premiership season before the league splits for its final five rounds. The “KMIs” are incidents identified as having affected the outcome of matches and you can perhaps surmise these have been selected for review on the basis of their being contentious.

“The panel comprises former players, managers and coaches, guided by experts on the Laws of the Game,” the statement continues. The identity of any of these individuals is shrouded in mystery. Indeed, “experts on the laws of the game” sound menacingly phantom. Are these cloaked figures referees? FIFA officials? Pub-quiz masters? Who knows.

“In the opinion of the IRP, based on incidents requested by the panel or submitted for consideration, 26 KMIs have been adjudged to have reached an incorrect outcome since the start of the season,” reads the self-flagellating declaration. While the figure is based on the “opinion” of a panel, and only refers to a cross-section of contentious decisions presented to it, there are those on various sides of the Scottish football spectrum who have already equated this anomaly to confirmation that their team has been wronged in some way.

“To date, there have been a total of 1181 VAR reviews conducted in the SPFL Premiership. Whilst the majority of these are silent checks of on field incidents which require no intervention, 76 have resulted in on-field reviews (0.4 on-field reviews per match) while another 36 have been factual overturns (ie offside, inside/outside penalty area).”

This is a particularly problematic passage. While the panel’s remit was to consider a narrow cross-section of “key match incidents” selected on the basis, presumably, that there was something in them worth re-assessing, this reference to the whole number of reviews brings in a figure in the thousands which only serves to abstract the “data” almost beyond comprehension.

Does "to date" mean since its introduction during the previous season? Since the start of the current season? Since the date of the statement's release? And the most outlandish and potentially revelatory phrase of all is this “36 have been factual overturns”. Factual? Offside? Really?

Referee John Beaton checks a pitchside monitor (Image: SNS)

READ MORE: 'The wrong way': Van Bronckhorst on regret of Rangers exit

The job of an assistant referee, to simultaneously conclude whether a player is beyond the last defender with a part of the body that can play the ball at the same time as judging the exact instant the ball has left the foot of their team-mate, is no enviable task. Yet, despite these apparent claims to the contrary, still-frame, two-dimensional images are also unable to establish these variables to any “factual” certainty. This aspect of VAR's application (and, indeed, justification) is pseudo-science.

Now more “facts” and figures: “90.3% of on-field decisions are considered correct by the IRP, increased to 97.8% when including VAR interventions.” What these percentages are of is unclear: the “KMIs” referred to? The 1181 VAR checks? Every decision made in every match ever? The mind boggles. But the intended message is clear: VAR works. VAR is worth it. You can't live without VAR. It's like that barrage of messages you receive reminding you of how you can't live without Netflix, Amazon Prime or Disney+ whenever you muster the courage to cancel one of their expensive subscriptions. 

The statement closes: “Scottish FA Referee Operations shared these statistics to the Premiership clubs on Wednesday morning as part of an update on the performance of VAR in Scotland.” The “statistics” offered here are of the junk-science variety, unfortunately. While the transparency and accountability sought in reviewing the implementation of VAR in its still fledgling presence in Scottish football is generally to be welcomed, the polemic, self-affirming, I-told-you-so conclusion offered here – the accuracy of refereeing decisions has increased to close to 100 per cent since VAR’s introduction – is about as scientific as the exit poll for one of Vladimir Putin’s Russian general elections.

Perhaps instead of “KMIs” and “IRPs” it should be RIP to VAR. If it’s a spring cleaning of erroneous spending habits Scottish football is looking for, they should just scratch that expensive video technology subscription from their direct debit statement.