People are confusing two separate bits of the VAR process and it makes sense to unpick them. There is a factual strand and a subjective strand. If VAR can resolve the basic factual question without the ref seeing the pictures, then a change to a penalty decision or not is often done without the referee going over to the monitor. That is the simple part and it is what most fans miss when they shout about "not following procedure".
The factual side
First up, factual issues are things like whether the contact happened inside or outside the box, or whether the ball was offside by a metre. Those are binary, concrete checks that VAR can spot and communicate to the referee. If VAR concludes the incident is outside the area, then a penalty is off the table and the referee can be told that without needing to view the replay personally. You can see why the process allows for that. It keeps decisions efficient and avoids unnecessary delays when the answer is obvious from the angles available to VAR.
Where subjectivity kicks in
Then there is the subjective assessment. With DOGSO type decisions the VAR and referee need to judge a collection of factors. Distance to goal, proximity of defenders, control of the attacker and the direction of play all come into it. Those are inherently judgement calls. To be fair, some of those can have factual elements to them. VAR can say how many metres separated defender and attacker, or how far from goal the shot was likely to be. But when those details feed into whether an opportunity was obvious, the referee normally needs to see the replays.
Why the monitor matters
Truth is, the monitor exists so the referee can weigh up the subtleties that VAR cannot entirely hand over as pure fact. Even if VAR provides crisp measurements, the overall reading of the incident is still a referee call. So when supporters gripe about "not following procedure", what they sometimes mean is the ref didn’t go and view an incident that most of us would have liked them to see. That is a fair frustration, but it isn’t the same as saying VAR got the simple facts wrong.
Ultimately this is about clarity and trust. If VAR can answer the factual question cleanly, fine. If the outcome hinges on interpretation of the 4 Ds then the monitor should come into play. Makes sense to me, and I reckon most fans would agree. If you want a fuller breakdown of how VAR fits into game management, shout and I’ll expand on it for Rangers News Views readers.
Related Articles
About Rangers News Views
Rangers News Views offers daily Glasgow Rangers coverage including match reaction, transfer analysis, SPFL context, tactical breakdowns and opinion-led articles written by supporters for supporters.
