The Problem With VAR at the 2026 World Cup Isn’t the Technology—It’s Who Interprets It
A controversial Argentina vs Egypt match at the 2026 World Cup has reignited debates over VAR, with Egypt filing a formal protest. Experts argue that the core issue is not the technology itself but the subjective interpretation of referees and gaps in training.
The Round of 16 match between Argentina and Egypt at the 2026 World Cup ended in a 3-2 victory for Argentina, but the game was overshadowed by controversy over the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system. Egypt, having led by two goals, complained that VAR was improperly used, influencing several refereeing decisions. The Egyptian Football Association filed a formal protest with FIFA, demanding an investigation into alleged inconsistencies.
Throughout the tournament, similar complaints have arisen, with critics claiming that VAR decisions appear to favor certain teams. Some argue that despite the technology, offside calls and other rulings are applied inconsistently. Others believe VAR disrupts the flow of the game and can be manipulated to adjust outcomes.
VAR was first used at a World Cup in 2018 and has since been implemented in over 100 competitions. For the 2026 edition, the system has access to 42 broadcast cameras, including eight super-slow-motion and four ultra-slow-motion cameras. A team of a video assistant referee and three assistants review footage to assist the on-field referee in decisions regarding goals, penalties, red cards, and, new for this tournament, second yellow cards and fouls before set pieces. Additionally, the so-called Prestianni-Vinícius Rule penalizes players who cover their mouths during confrontations.
Former Mexican World Cup referee Armando Archundia notes that FIFA trains about 100 potential referees over four years through up to four annual meetings. For the 2026 World Cup, 54 referees were selected, but only 20% of participating countries use VAR in their domestic leagues, meaning many referees have limited experience. Sports analyst Fernando Galván points out that earlier refereeing evolved slower than the game itself, and VAR was meant to help but created over-reliance. He believes FIFA’s new guidelines aim to restore some autonomy to the center referee.
Both experts agree that soccer is subjective and that human interpretation remains crucial. Archundia states, “It is the individual judgment of each referee that makes the decision, because not even VAR is going to support them in that regard.” While AI-powered robots might officiate in the future, for now, the human element prevails, and the challenge is to bridge the technological gap and standardize criteria across the globe.
