One of the brains behind the development of VAR has admitted it is an innovation he is not proud of as it continues to dominate the headlines in football.
VAR has become one of the most controversial topics in modern sport, with football fans still divided over the implementation of the technology that was initially intended to clarify the gray areas of refereeing.
The system currently in place is frequently criticized in the media and, if anything, calls to referees appear to be under more intense scrutiny than before its introduction.
This was said by Paul Hawkins, who founded the Hawk-Eye firm that developed the system used in football and many other sports. The times how VAR is the sporting innovation he is “least proud of.”
However, he noted that the main idea behind this was to take pressure off the referees, so that they would go unnoticed in the game, rather than being put under the microscope.
Paul Hawkins, who developed Hawk-Eye, has revealed that VAR is the contribution to the sport he is “least proud of”
VAR decisions have become one of the most divisive issues in football in the modern era.
Your browser does not support iframes.
In this he felt that VAR had not been very successful and compared it to tennis and cricket; sports in which technology receives comparatively much less attention than in football.
“VAR is the contribution to sport I am least proud of,” Hawkins said. ‘My idea of ​​technology in sport is that referees go unnoticed. The goal of a good referee is to go unnoticed and keep the refereeing out of the history of the game.
“At the other end of the spectrum, my proudest moment is (Rafael) Nadal against (Roger) Federer in 2008, in probably the best Wimbledon final in history. Nadal came within two sets of winning and in the tie-break In the third set there was a whistle that went in their favor at a critical point.
‘Federer challenged and was disallowed, and won the point. That point made the difference in who won the set and went from what could have been Nadal winning three sets with a bad line at the end of the match, to refereeing without being mentioned and Nadal winning the best Wimbledon final ever. for three sets to two.
«The measure of Hawk-Eye’s contribution is how little it is talked about. How do we do this so that it is as little noticeable as possible?’
Many football fans have offered their own suggestions for this very question in the years since its inception.
One such idea that is rarely mentioned is a challenge-based system, or in other words, each team could “challenge” a call made by the referee, who only then turns to technology to make the correct decision.
In fact, this is what Hawkins claims was initially the idea behind VAR, and one of three proposals he made to suggest how the technology could be improved, stating: “That was the intention when VAR was first trialled.” In Dutch football, we would try challenge systems.
Hawkins offered four ways VAR could be improved, including a challenge-based system.
He also suggested that instead of all referees serving as VAR, specialized agents could be introduced.
‘You could have one incorrect challenge per match. In the 2019 Ashes, where Ben Stokes hit that knock to win the (Headingley Test match), Australia had run out of reviews and were stone cold, but the umpire said no. There was no headline about the referee’s bad decision. The story was about the players.
‘You could have a challenge system that didn’t include black and white decisions, such as offside. Most of the time, teams know if there was a violation or not. Maybe you can even have an extra challenge in games like the Champions League final or the World Cup final.’
Hawkins’ second suggestion involved agents working solely on VAR, rather than all referees rotating between on-field and behind-the-screen duties at Stockley Park, where referees often had to oversee their own decisions. colleagues.
Idea No 3 is a simpler move that is another popular one among those suggesting improvements, and that is to make audio and replays available to fans in stadiums, much like in rugby.
Fans have become increasingly impatient with the length of time needed to make decisions through VAR, with a winner for West Ham overturned against Aston Villa after a review lasting five minutes and 37 seconds.
“Football fans’ patience can be increased in a similar way by making VAR audio and, where possible, video replays, available in stadiums while reviews are taking place,” Hawkins said.
“That would be a big step forward for fans because they won’t feel completely in the dark.”
However, the most common complaint against VAR is perhaps its use to determine whether players are offside, often arriving at decisions based on extremely fine margins.
Many have complained about this, suggesting that VAR was used to rule out “clear and obvious errors”, and if a goal is ruled out because a defender was marginally behind the attackers, it can’t be any of those things.
Hawkins added: “It is much easier to judge whether an attacker’s torso is in front of the defender’s and it is easier for a linesman to see than it is for a foot, and it is a much simpler technical solution for offsides. “automatic”.
Ben Stokes clearly lost lbw during the 2019 Ashes Test at Headingley but the umpire didn’t indicate it.
The VAR decision in West Ham’s draw against Aston Villa took five minutes and 39 seconds
‘Offsides were put in place to prevent the goal from hanging, but what about all the balls kicked in the final third, can’t you be offside? That could create a little more space and maybe make for a better game.
“If you are slightly offside after a cross-court hit from inside the final third of the field, that has nothing to do with hanging the goal. Ice hockey does that very well.
“A lot more testing should be done in football to get concrete evidence about what might work; something like college football would be the ideal environment, since universities are supposed to be in the business of experimenting.”
“For me, fans should not see something like VAR or change how injury time is calculated for the first time in a World Cup.”