Premier League clubs to vote on scrapping VAR next season

Premier League clubs have been forced into a vote over whether to scrap VAR after Wolverhampton Wanderers submitted a proposal to get rid of the system.

Under Premier League rules a club can put forward a proposal to discuss at the regular shareholders’ meetings – with the annual general meeting held in June. As things stand there is no evidence that Wolves’ proposal, to get rid of VAR, has strong support among their fellow 19 clubs, although there is likely to be lively debate until that AGM.

Wolves issued a lengthy statement announcing their proposal saying that “a small increase in accuracy” was “at odds with the spirit of the game” and that VAR should be scrapped. The Premier League, which opposes the proposals, says that the accuracy of all decisions has gone up from 86 per cent before VAR to 92 per cent since it was introduced at the start of the 2019-2020 season.

Wolves said in their statement that it was seeking the “best possible outcome for football”. The club listed 10 reasons why VAR should be abolished, from its “impact on goal celebrations” to “fuelling completely nonsensical allegations of corruption.”

English clubs playing in European competitions would continue to be subject to VAR, as per Uefa’s approach. The European governing body has no intention of scrapping the technology. A senior figure at another Premier League club told Telegraph Sport there was “no chance at all” of 14 Premier League clubs – the super-majority needed – voting for VAR to be scrapped.

Wolves’ forcing of a vote came barely a month after Premier League clubs voted unanimously for the introduction of semi-automated offside, an extension of existing VAR technology, to the competition next season.

A range of Premier League clubs, speaking to Telegraph Sport in confidence, said on Wednesday night that they would welcome improvements to VAR. None said categorically that they would support Wolves’ proposal to scrap it although some did confirm they would oppose such a measure. Wolves’ proposal was unusual in that there was no lobbying of fellow clubs beforehand and neither did it have the support of the Premier League board.

The club’s decision is understood to have been made with the support of all senior figures including chairman Jeff Shi, director of football Matt Hobbs and manager Gary O’Neil. The club feels raw over many of the VAR decisions it has been on the receiving end of this season. The club’s supporters’ trust is in support of the proposal.

Nevertheless, Wolves’ unilateral announcement of the decision will have gone down badly at the Premier League which encourages debate between members before decisions – or disagreements – are presented to the wider world in a manner that is agreed by all members.

The laws of the game for VAR are not within the Premier League’s remit to change. Those are conceived by Ifab, the international body which controls the laws of the game and its various amendments. PGMOL [the organisation that organises officials in the English game] works on behalf of the Premier League, Football Association and Football League.

All are ultimately bound by Fifa and Ifab’s policy on the laws of the game.

In a statement the Premier League confirmed it would “facilitate a discussion” on VAR at the AGM in Harrogate next month. It said: “Clubs are entitled to put forward proposals at shareholders’ meetings and we acknowledge the concerns and issues around the use of VAR. However, the league fully supports the use of VAR and remains committed, alongside PGMOL [Professional Game Match Officials] to make continued improvements to the system for the benefit of the game and fans.”

Wolves said that the “decision (was) made in good faith and with the best interests of football and the Premier League at its heart”. It said VAR has “led to numerous unintended negative consequences that are damaging the relationship between fans and football, and undermining the value of the Premier League brand.”

The club’s list of 10 reasons included “frustration and confusion” among fans, “a more hostile atmosphere” and “the erosion of authority” of on-field officials.

Speaking on Sky Sports last night, Wayne Rooney said that he supported Wolves’ proposal. Asked whether it should be scrapped, he said “Please (do)”. “I don’t like VAR. If it’s fair and they get all the decisions right then fair enough but it’s taken all the enjoyment out of the game.

“You’re a goal scorer and you’re having to wait to celebrate and the fans are having to wait to celebrate and then they’re getting decisions wrong. I think you’re better off letting the referees ref it - understanding they will make mistakes. I’d much rather see it without VAR.”

Removing VAR from the Premier League would put it at odds with the other leading leagues in Europe as well as the Uefa competitions. Uefa introduced VAR in 239 additional matches this season across the Champions League, Europa League and Europa Conference League with a further expansion next season.

The most recent National Supporters Survey carried out by the Football Supporters’ Association, published last June, found that almost two thirds of fans were against VAR. That compared with nearly three-quarters who had been in favour of trials of video referees for game-changing decisions shortly before the system’s introduction.

PGMOL failed to quell mounting anger towards the system this season after being forced to make emergency changes to its VAR operations following September’s Liverpool offside goal fiasco.

Two months later, it emerged that Premier League managers were demanding another overhaul of a system Mikel Arteta branded “embarrassing” and a “disgrace” after Arsenal’s controversial defeat at Newcastle United.

Only last month, Nottingham Forest’s fury at a hat-trick of penalty decisions in their defeat at Everton saw them post an extraordinary statement on X in which they called the integrity of VAR into question and suggested that Stuart Attwell, the match VAR, might have been influenced by a loyalty to Luton Town.

Why Sweden turned its back on VAR

Sweden’s top tier is the only competition in Uefa’s top 30 leagues to reject VAR, with the technology formally ruled out just three weeks before Wolverhampton Wanderers tabled their Premier League proposal.

The majority of clubs in the top two divisions had “actively opposed” VAR since July last year, the Swedish Professional Football Leagues said. Swedish Football Association (SvFF) chairman Fredrik Reinfeldt then confirmed on April 24 that the authority is not looking to implement VAR.

The key difference between Sweden and English competition is the amount of say fans have directly in footballing matters at the top of the game. Clubs in Sweden’s Allsvenskan are required to be at least 51 per cent owned by their supporters, which goes some way to explaining why Wolves are convinced they can get public opinion onside with their shock proposal to axe the technology.

“If I counted correctly, we have 18 elite clubs and two districts that have said they do not want to introduce VAR,” Reinfeldt, the former prime minister of Sweden, told the Swedish Aftonbladet newspaper earlier this month.

“We respect that. That’s why we didn’t bring forward any proposal about VAR to the previous board of representatives meeting and I don’t foresee it in the future either. I stand by respecting the democratic rules of the game.”

Reinfeldt had previously believed that VAR was “the future”  but after being criticised, the 58-year-old said he made those comments when he believed Uefa would make the implementation of VAR mandatory.

“I don’t think so now, from what I’ve heard, so then it is up to us to make the decision,” he added.

The decision was entirely down to supporter power. Ola Thews, vice-chairman of AIK’s largest supporter organisation, ASK, let campaigns against its use. “VAR is a symbol of modern, commercialised-to-the-point-of-destruction football,” he had said.

Thews is reported as saying VAR “ruins the euphoria” that football can bring. “The absolute happiness and passion, or grief and sadness, that comes from a goal being conceded or a goal being scored if you’re not sure what has happened until it has been reviewed and decided in a VAR room.”

Officials in Sweden are closely monitoring whether refereeing is suffering as a result of the absence of VAR. Martin Ingvarsson, the nation’s head of referees, had told reporters there were 41 occasions when VAR would have intervened had it been in use. “I think anything where you have actual real-life humans participating is going to be imperfect,” he said. “That’s the beauty of it.”

Bersant Celina, a midfielder for AIK, also appears to be in favour of the Swedish stance. “It’s the proper football way,” he told the Associated Press. “It’s pure. “Referees are also part of the game and they can make mistakes.”

Q&A: Why now – and what happens next

Why has this happened now?

It would appear the patience of the Wolverhampton Wanderers hierarchy, led by chairman Jeff Shi, has finally snapped following a succession of VAR gaffes and controversies they feel have cost them several points this season. But rather than risk being accused of sour grapes, their statement confirming they had formally submitted a resolution to the Premier League to trigger a vote of clubs on scrapping VAR instead seeks to highlight that they have been far from alone in suffering from the “numerous unintended negative consequences that are damaging the relationship between fans and football, and undermining the value of the Premier League brand”.

Will VAR be scrapped?

Wolves did not consult other clubs before tabling their resolution and there was no evidence on Wednesday that they would secure anywhere near the 14 votes required to change the Premier League rulebook. Indeed, clubs were queuing up to let it be known they would vote against the resolution one senior figure said had “no chance at all” of being approved. Wolves’ move also came barely a month after all 20 teams unanimously voted in favour of the introduction of semi-automated offside, an extension of VAR technology, to the world’s richest league next season, hardly the act of those planning to scrap the system.

Do fans get a say?

Wolves’ plan seems to involve triggering the kind of supporter revolt that brought down the European Super League, because fans have no direct say over VAR. If they did then the resolution might just carry, judging by the most recent National Supporters Survey carried out by the Football Supporters’ Association, published last June, which found that almost two thirds of fans were against the system. That compared with nearly three-quarters who had been in favour of trials of video referees for game-changing decisions shortly before their introduction. The chances of fans taking to the streets en masse to protest against VAR are slim to none.

Are there any other leagues to scrap VAR?

Despite widespread exasperation with VAR in the countries to have adopted it, a competition had yet to trigger the nuclear option of scrapping it altogether. However, just last month, the football authorities in Sweden became the first to abandon plans to introduce the system following a fan revolt. The president of the Swedish Football Association, Fredrik Reinfeldt, confirmed VAR would not be implemented in its competitions – having previously proclaimed the system “our future” – amid opposition from more than half of the top 32 teams. The climbdown reflected Swedish clubs being at least 51 per cent fan-owned and fierce resistance among supporters to VAR’s introduction.