Do we need VAR in the game?

I managed to listen in on Eddie Howe's pre-match interview for Sky on the FA Cup match against Wigan Athletic last week when he was asked a question about Video Assistant Referee (VAR) technology being brought into the Premier League. The first game was designated as the Brighton v Crystal Palace FA Cup game today, and Eddie Howe was quite forthright in admitting that he was yet to be convinced about VAR and did not want to see the game slowed down, as the speed of football in England was one of the aspects that make it so exciting and addictive to the worldwide audience. Well this week, I had an email sent to me by an avid fan of AFCB and Cherry Chimes who had been looking at how the Premier League could get more decisions right and he came up with another solution.

Have we enough officials or does VAR offer a better solution?

The reader in question is John who lives in Toronto, Canada. This is what he had to say.

"I watch lots of games, not only AFCB, and there is no doubt that there are many calls that are either missed or incorrect. However, is VAR the answer? We have seen video replay in NFL (U.S.) football, and it has been very disruptive. Originally limited to just scoring plays, it now goes to many other circumstances - in/out of bounds, catch/no catch, fumble/no fumble, positioning of the ball, etc. Some reviews can take a couple of minutes, lengthening the time of the game and stopping the natural flow. Furthermore, video replay cannot fix a bad or unclear rule. In the NFL, the definition of a clean catch has changed over the past few years, to the point that players and fans are never sure what is and what isn't, and referee rulings are inconsistent. So we go to replay and then come away dissatisfied with the result, because of a flawed rule. I relate this mostly to handball in the PL. The rule needs to be much more objective (intentional? natural position of the body/arm) because VAR would only put a spotlight on the issue.

"Tell me, has the notion of a second referee on the pitch ever been debated over there? Players are bigger, faster, and very clever, so wouldn't a second ref get a better look at the play? This was done in professional hockey, and while it took about a full season to streamline it (mostly, which referee made the call in any given circumstance), it does seem to work. I never hear any talk about a second referee, I assume it has come up at some point but been discarded?"

Thanks John for your views and questions. Personally, I am open to seeing what VAR will bring to the game and think it is something that is going to come in at some stage. What it is used for though is my big problem. I think it can only be used to decide if a foul is inside or outside the box at the moment unless technology can tell us something more about whether a player has dived or not.

On the point of two referees, I would like to see it trialled but I do wonder with three officials on the pitch and the fourth official at the moment they still don't get everything right. Would two referees improve things or would they argue about a decision? Would one have more power than the other one? And would we see every decision need the agreement of the two referees or only the big decisions?

I guess the whole idea of VAR and getting better refereeing decisions is always going to be a minefield in a game of opinions. I don't know the answers but I think it is important that fans as well as the governing bodies get the chance to debate these issues or the game will change in a way that the majority of fans are not happy about.

Please, let's have your comments on this if you feel strongly either way about VAR or any of the points raised in this post. You can even post anonymously in the comments section on the blog, but your voice will still be heard.