How Football's VAR System Can Learn From Cricket

We think we know how to improve the controversial VAR system! If you haven't heard people talking about VAR today then you must be hiding away from all of the snow.

Last night saw VAR thrusted back into the spotlight as the FA continue to trial the system in selected cup fixtures across the country. We have already seen the debate about whether VAR ruins celebrations and if there needs to be something in place to let the fans in the ground know what's happening. Over the last few games we have seen a new issue arise. What happens when a decision is so tight that it could be considered a 50/50 call?

I know some of you might be thinking, how an earth can football learn anything from cricket, the two sports couldn't possibly be any more different, even if they tried. The answer comes in the form of the Decision Review System (DRS) in cricket. DRS has been around since 2008, so has developed over the past decade into an effective system. 

For those who aren't cricket fans and don't know what DRS is, it's a system that allows players to review a decision made by the on-field umpire and ask that the third umpire (tv umpire/equivalent of VAR), who has a range of technology available to him, whether there is enough evidence to overturn the on-field decision.

The key point in the rules of cricket is there needs to be clear evidence to overturn the on-field decision. 

Relating this back to football, the referee will have an inclination as to whether he thinks it should be a penalty, a red card or even whether the linesman thinks it is offside (something which we know is usually black and white, however, we saw in Manchester United vs Huddersfield Town VAR rule out a Manchester United goal when the offside called was so tight that it couldn't be clear).

A way to simplify some of the controversy is to follow a similar, clear process to cricket. Football involves a lot of subjective decisions, you could be sat at the pub with 10 people who each have their own view on a decision.

The on-field call should only be changed if there is clear evidence to do so, this way we won't have VAR overturning multiple decisions in every game. Other sports have nailed down their version of VAR due to the technology being used for several years, so we don't think it should be all negative press. 

The system will be improved over time and if nothing else, it gives us plenty to chat about in the pub doesn't it!