Did the Referee Make a Mistake or Did Technology Fail Us? A Legal Reading in the VAR Controversy
By Lawyer Osama Al-Bitar | December 19, 2025
The recent football championships, highlighted by the Arab Cup, have reignited an enduring debate about the role of Video Assistant Referee (VAR) technology and its effectiveness in delivering justice on the football pitch. As fans and analysts argue over contentious decisions, a deeper question arises: is the problem rooted in the technology itself, or does it stem from our fundamental understanding of refereeing and sporting justice?
VAR was introduced not as a replacement for referees but as an aid to minimize clear and obvious errors during matches, without undermining the referee’s discretionary power. Still, experience has demonstrated that despite the precision of technological tools, the inherent human element remains central, and there will always be situations open to interpretation that technology alone cannot resolve decisively.
It is crucial to differentiate between two types of errors often confused in public discussions. The first includes objective mistakes — for example, clear offside positions or wrongly disallowed or allowed goals — which technology can verify. The second category comprises judgment calls, such as assessing the severity of contact between players or interpreting intent or force, which are more subjective in nature.
VAR was designed to intervene only in the first category of clear factual errors, not in subjective judgments. When VAR attempts to adjudicate discretionary matters, it inadvertently shifts from being a neutral assistant to becoming a participant in the controversy, a role never intended by its creators.
From a regulatory perspective, the referee on the field retains the final authority, even after consulting the VAR system. The technology provides supplementary information but does not override or transfer decision-making responsibility away from the human official. Thus, framing VAR as a form of “pure technological justice” overlooks the critical fact that the ultimate judgment lies with the referee.
Moreover, making a refereeing mistake during a match does not automatically trigger legal liability within the sports context, provided the error is unintentional and not linked to malice or major procedural breaches. The essence of sports officiating embraces the principle that errors are part of the game and not always grounds for formal dispute.
The heart of the controversy does not always concern achieving an outcome that all spectators deem fair, but rather whether the process to reach that decision was fair, transparent, and consistent. Sporting justice, much like legal justice, is not measured solely by acceptance of the result but by the integrity of procedures used to arrive at that result.
When referees follow established protocols, VAR is utilized within its legal and technical limitations, and discretionary decisions are made responsibly and within defined boundaries, post-match debates should be viewed as normal and inevitable elements of competitive sports — not symptoms of a broken system.
Looking ahead, the evolving landscape of sports refereeing presents new questions, particularly as artificial intelligence (AI) tools begin automating aspects of officiating. AI has started to assist in making near-automatic offside calls, analyzing player movement, interpreting angles, optimizing decision timing, and even evaluating referee performance.
Yet, these advancements bring forth critical legal and ethical considerations: if an intelligent system errs, who bears responsibility? Is it the programmer, the company behind the software, the football association deploying it, or should ultimate accountability remain with human referees regardless of technological progress?
The likely future model will not consist of pure AI-based refereeing but will feature a hybrid approach combining sophisticated technology with human oversight. This will require clear legal frameworks to delineate responsibilities and ensure that algorithms do not evolve into “unaccountable arbiters” on the field.
Ultimately, sporting justice, like the broader concept of legal justice, cannot be reduced to algorithms or screens alone. It depends on maintaining a delicate balance between human judgment, technological assistance, and the governing rules that structure their interaction.
As the football world continues to embrace new technologies, understanding these dynamics remains essential for preserving fairness and integrity in the beautiful game.
© 2025 TurnPoint. All rights reserved.
Article originally published on Khaberni.
