There are no plans to broadcast live video assistant referee communication because it would be too “chaotic” to listen to and potentially create “an unsafe environment for referees”.
Last month, Luis Diaz wrongly had a goal disallowed for offside as Liverpool lost 2-1 to Tottenham, and the VAR audio for that decision was subsequently released.
The International Football Association Board (Ifab) believes fans should be informed of decisions, but not hear them being made live.
“I categorically say no, they shouldn’t,” Ifab secretary and chief executive Lukas Brud told BBC Radio 5 Live Breakfast’s Rick Edwards.
“I was allowed to observe and see communication between match officials during a review and it is quite a chaotic situation, not in a negative sense but there’s many people talking at the same time and I think it would be counterproductive for anyone to listen to all those voices talking to each other.
“Then you have the VAR and the assistant VAR, the replay operators, the referee and maybe even the assistant referees and fourth official, so all of a sudden it becomes quite a chaotic experience.
“We have given the green light to test the announcement of decisions to bring a little more transparency to decision making, but we are not prepared at this point to open up communication live to the audience.”
The audio recordings of discussions between the match officials around Diaz’s disallowed goal were made public by referees’ body PGMOL, who said the error was a result of a “lapse of concentration and loss of focus”.
PGMOL said it recognised standards “fell short of expectations” in the incident and released a number of “key learnings”, which it said would “mitigate against the risk of a future error”.
Can football follow systems used in other sports?
Fifa has trialled having the outcomes of decisions made by VAR communicated to television viewers and those in the stadium by match referees in some of their competitions, including the Women’s World Cup in the summer.
There have also been calls for football to follow other sports such as rugby and cricket in how they communicate on field decisions to fans, but Brud feels direct comparisons are unrealistic.
“They are different sports with different set ups,” he added. “We cannot compare by simply saying it is the same. In football, processes are slightly different.
“Football is different because everyone is putting a magnifying glass on every decision and every single word would then be analysed in the media and it would create a very unsafe environment for referees.
“They need to feel safe when they are focused on decision-making.”
A window of time to reverse decisions?
One issue that arose from the release of the VAR audio from the offside error in the Liverpool-Tottenham match was the inability to stop play and reverse the incorrect decision.
IFAB rules on VAR state play cannot be brought back once it has been started after a decision has been made “except for a case of mistaken identity or for a potential sending-off offence relating to violent conduct, spitting, biting or extremely offensive, insulting and/or abusive action(s).”
However, Brud also ruled out the potential for a window of time in which decisions made by human error could be reversed.
“We always have to remember these things don’t happen very often,” he said.
“We should not immediately start questioning the entire set up because in one of thousands of matches this situation has occurred.
“Certainly we are going to improve if need be certain areas of VAR. Whether we need to solve an issue where humans made an error, let’s see.”
The speed of VAR decision-making has also been an issue since its introduction.
During Burnley’s 2-1 loss to Bournemouth at the weekend, VAR took more than five minutes to rule out a late goal for the Clarets for offside.
Asked about the possibility of semi-automated or automated offsides being brought in to assist referees, Burd added: “There is always development in the technology being used and I am sure at some point we will see something between semi-automatic and automatic calls because technology is getting better.
“But you will always have the passive offside position. Match officials still have to judge if a player who was in an offside position was having an impact in the game.
“I am sure the decision-making will be quicker, but there will always be a human intervention when it comes to offside.”
Sin-bins and cutting down referee abuse
Brud also said Ifab is looking into measures that could be implemented to reduce the amount of abuse referees receive, particularly at grassroots level.
Sin-bins – a player receiving a temporary dismissal from the pitch – is something that is being looked at.
“We are currently evaluation what kind of measures there are,” Brud said.
“At grassroots level and in a number of leagues in England, referees are wearing body cameras now as a form of deterrent to misbehaviours – and results so far have been very positive.
“We are looking into different ways, but we also want to help referees officiate matches in a fair way and also make sure players and coaching staff also behave appropriately.
“Football is not an emotional wastebasket, it’s sport, it’s supposed to be fun. We need to cut out some deeply-rooted behaviour.”
