The evaluation of the video assistant referee from referees’ and spectators’ perspectives in soccer – A case study of the German Bundesliga

ABSTRACT

Fairness is one of the key requirements for sport. Thus, the refereeing must be impartial. Therefore, to ensure that a referee can make verifiable correct decisions increasingly technical aids are used during live play. In soccer, next to goal-line technologies (GLT), the introduction of a Video Assistant Referee (VAR) was a major step to increase fairness in decision-making. Accordingly, the present study aimed to further investigate how the VAR in soccer is accepted and whether there is a difference between soccer referees’ and fans’ perceptions regarding the VAR. Therefore, self-identified soccer fans and/or former or active referees were contacted through various outlets leading to 1.442 completed questionnaires. The results indicated that soccer referees evaluate the VAR more positively compared to soccer fans. This supports previous research regarding the VAR but highlights the need for soccer associations to further educate spectators about the merits of the VAR.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. DFL, ‘Erst ‘offline‘, dann ‘live‘.

2. Milanovic, ‘Globalization and goals’.

3. Garcia-del-Barrio and Szymanski, ‘Goal! Profit Maximization Versus Win Maximization in Soccer’.

4. Furrer, Godoy and Blatter, ‘Football History’.

5. Feltes, ‘Match Fixing in Western Europe’.

6. Spitz et al., ’VAR: The impact of technology on decision making in association football referees’.

7. Vögele and Schäfer, ‘Fußball-Schiedsrichter im Spiegel der Medien‘.

8. FIFA,’Goal-line Technology has Arrived in Football’.

9. PL. ‘The history of goalline technology’.

10. Farrell, ’Brief History (And Defence) of VAR’.

11. Nahar, ’Torlinientechnik’.

12. d’Andréa and Stauff, ’Mediatized Engagements with Technologies’.

13. Bundesliga, ‘So arbeiten Video-Assistent und Schiedsrichter‘.

14. Tamir and Bar-eli, ’The moral goalkeeper’.

15. DFL, ‘Erst ‘offline‘, dann ‘live‘‘.

16. Zglinski, ’Rules, Standards, and the Video Assistant Referee in Football’.

17. Lamatsch, ‘Keller-Schiri‘.

18. Lago-Peñas, Rey, and Kalén, ’How does VAR modify the game in elite soccer?’.

19. Frandsen and Landgrebe, ’Video Assistant Referee in a Small-Nation Context’.

20. Bordner, ’Call ‘Em as They Are: What’s Wrong with Blown Calls and What to Do about Them’.

21. Bresemann and Dutler, ‘Kritik an RasenBallsport Leipzig‘.

22. Spitz et al., ’VAR: The impact of technology on decision making in association football referees’.

23. Carlos, Ezequiel, and Anton, ’How Does Video Assistant Referee (VAR) Modify the Game in Elite Soccer?’.

24. Carlos, Ezequiel, and Anton, ’How Does Video Assistant Referee (VAR) Modify the Game in Elite Soccer?’.

25. Cairns, ’The Effects of Television on Stadia and Spectatorship’.

26. Spitz et al., ’VAR: The impact of technology on decision making in association football referees’.

27. Han et al., ’The influence of the video assistant referee on the Chinese Super League‘.

28. Samuel et al., ’Implementation of the video assistant referee (VAR) as a career change-event’.

29. Chen and Davidson, ’English Premier League manager perceptions of VAR decisions during the 2019 2020 season’.

30. Winand and Fergusson, ’More decision-aid technology in sport?’.

31. Winand et al., ’Sports fans and innovation’.

32. Zglinski, ’Rules, Standards, and the Video Assistant Referee in Football’.

33. Kolbinger and Knopp, ’Video kills the sentiment’.

34. Ludvigsen, ’The Premier League-globalization nexus’.

35. van den Berg and Surujlal, ’Video assistant referee: spectator and fan perceptions and experiences’.

36. Nurcahya et al., ‘Improving the performance of football assistant referee through video-based training’.

37. Bundesliga, ‘So arbeiten Video-Assistent und Schiedsrichter‘.

38. Spitz et al., ‘VAR: The impact of technology on decision making in association football referees’.

39. Deloitte, ‘Annual Review of Football Finance 2019’.

40. Kolbinger and Knopp, ‘Video kills the sentiment’.

41. Winand and Fergusson, ‘More decision-aid technology in sport?’.

42. Zglinski, ‘Rules, Standards, and the Video Assistant Referee in Football’.

43. Samuel et al., ’Implementation of the video assistant referee (VAR) as a career change-event’.

44. Cohen, ’Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences’.

45. Winand et al., ’Sports fans and innovation’.

46. Rafati, ‘Ich pfeife auf den Tod!‘.

47. Lamatsch, ‘Schiedsrichter aus Leidenschaft‘.

48. Hamsund and Scelles, ‘Fans’ perception towards VAR in the English premier league’.

49. Lütticke, ‘Keine Schwarz-Weiß-Szene‘.

50. Lamatsch, ‘Keller-Schiri‘.

51. Collins and Higgins, ‘Bad Call’.

52. Wunderlich et al., ‘How does spectator presence affect football?’.

53. Deloitte, ‘Football Money (League, 2020)’.

54. Scelles et al., ’What drives sports TV rights?’.

55. Solberg and Mehus, ’The challenge of attracting football fans to stadia?’.

56. Addesa and Bond, ’Determinants of stadium attendance in Italian Serie A’.

57. Bond and Addesa, ’TV demand for the Italian Serie A’.

58. Bond and Addesa, ’Competitive Intensity, Fans’ Expectations’.

59. Scelles et al., ‘Insolvency in French soccer’.

60. Szymanski, ‘Insolvency in English professional football’.

61. Szymanski and Weimar, ‘Insolvencies in professional football’.

62. DFL, ‘Erst ‘offline‘, dann ‘live‘‘.