- BIST10012,151-0.94%
- USD49.220.00%
- EUR55.21+0.28%
- GOLD4,192.30-0.57%
- INTEREST37.00%-1.00
- BITCOIN82,747-1.11%
- October 12, 202619°
- BIST10012,151-0.94%
- USD49.220.00%
- EUR55.21+0.28%
- GOLD4,192.30-0.57%
- INTEREST37.00%-1.00
- BITCOIN82,747-1.11%
- October 12, 202619°
VAR decisions continue to spark controversy at the 2026 World Cup
The penalty not awarded in the England-Ghana match, Brazil's disallowed goal, and VAR calls in the Germany-Ecuador game have drawn major criticism. FIFA Referees Committee Chairman Pierluigi Collina's minimum intervention policy is creating difficulties in implementation.
With the start of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, Video Assistant Referee (VAR) applications have once again taken center stage in football discussions. The decisions made or not made in key matches over the past week, in particular, have caused significant confusion among fans, players, and pundits.
The incidents so far in the tournament highlight the uncertainty surrounding when the technology will be used and on what basis decisions are reached.
Penalty appeal in the England-Ghana match
The first major controversy erupted in the goalless draw between Ghana and England. Ghana head coach Carlos Queiroz strongly criticized the failure to award a penalty despite his player Prince Kwabena Adu going down after a challenge from English defender Ezri Konsa. Queiroz expressed his lack of trust in the technology, saying "VAR went for a coffee." Many pundits argued that the incident should at least have been reviewed by the referee at the pitchside monitor.
Brazil's disallowed goal
The following day, in Brazil's 3-0 win over Scotland, Vinicius Junior's goal was disallowed by VAR due to a foul on Jack Hendry. Former assistant referee Darren Cann, speaking on the BBC's Match of the Day program, said, "There was slight contact before the ball arrived, but in my opinion it wasn't at the level of a foul." This decision was criticized as inconsistent with the more lenient approach seen the previous day.
Double standards in the Germany-Ecuador match
The controversy peaked in the match where Germany lost 2-1 to Ecuador. Leroy Sane's goal was allowed to stand despite teammate Aleksandar Pavlovic's high foot challenge on an opponent's head. Former England goalkeeper Joe Hart commented on the same program, saying, "If any player watches this, they'd immediately call it a dangerous play. The decision was definitely wrong."
At the start of the second half, a penalty was awarded in Germany's favor after Kai Havertz went down. However, this time VAR intervened, detecting a foul by Sane on Pedro Vite at the start of the move, and the penalty was overturned. In the same match, a high boot went unpunished on one side, while a similar level of physicality led to a penalty being withdrawn on the other, clearly exposing the inconsistency in VAR application.
Comparison with the Premier League and Champions League
Interestingly, statistics suggest the frequency of VAR intervention at the World Cup is not vastly different from the Premier League. Last season, the Premier League averaged 0.29 VAR interventions per match, while at the World Cup, the figure stands at 0.28. Cases where the referee was called to the monitor to review an incident were recorded at 0.15 in the Premier League and 0.17 at the World Cup.
In contrast, a much more interventionist approach is adopted in the UEFA Champions League. In that competition, the average VAR intervention per match is 0.47, while pitchside reviews reach a considerably higher 0.36. UEFA's stricter interpretation, particularly regarding handball, and its reduction of personal discretion, are seen as the key factors explaining this difference.
Collina's minimum intervention philosophy
FIFA Referees Committee Chairman Pierluigi Collina advocates for fast and fluid play at the World Cup, arguing that not every contact should be deemed a foul. Accordingly, efforts are made to strictly adhere to the "clear and obvious error" principle. However, as the quality of on-field decisions declines, maintaining the minimum intervention policy becomes more difficult, fueling further debate.
Have the big teams been affected so far?
Despite all the noise, it cannot be said that VAR has directly harmed the major favorites so far. Aside from Brazil's disallowed goal and Germany's overturned penalty, no clear victimization has emerged. Notably, in the France-Senegal match, despite the VAR official recommending a penalty after Sadio Mane's challenge on Kylian Mbappe, the on-field referee rejected this advice, making a remarkable decision.
Collina, working with 30 VAR officials at the operations center in Dallas, will face his biggest challenge in restoring the technology's credibility in the remaining matches. The validity of the slogan "Less intervention, more benefit" will continue to depend on the accuracy of the first decisions made on the field.
Stay Updated with The Turkiye Times
Subscribe to be informed about special news, developments and announcements. We will keep you informed.
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy
