VAR Is Not the Enemy: Re-reading Vietnamese Football's Most Controversial Decision Through a Referee's Eye

Minute 78, the score is 1-1. The winger of the home team receives the ball at the edge of the box, curls it into space with the outside of his boot. The striker races through, touching the ball a split second before the opposing defender lunges in. The whistle blows. The referee points to the penalty spot. The stadium erupts. But then, everything stops. The referee's hand goes to his ear, his finger pointing toward the screen. Four minutes later, the decision is overturned. No penalty. Nothing at all. Home fans are furious, players surround the referee, the coaching staff throws water bottles to the ground. In the stands, phones are raised, recording the big screen, and within ten minutes, Vietnamese social media is flooded with statuses: "VAR is robbing us," "the referee is corrupt," "Vietnamese football will never be fair." I have witnessed this scene more than once. In five years of following Vietnamese football, I have seen at least twenty similar situations — where VAR overturned an initial decision and fans reacted as if the rules had just changed right before their eyes. But as someone who has spent his entire career explaining referee laws, I realize that the problem is not VAR. The problem is that we — fans, players, even commentators — have never truly understood the laws we are complaining about. Let me offer a different perspective. In a match between Hanoi FC and Ho Chi Minh City FC in V-League 2026, a similar situation occurred. The away team's striker fell in the box after a collision with a defender. The referee immediately awarded a penalty. VAR intervened, and after reviewing the footage, the referee overturned the decision. The reason? According to Law 12 of IFAB — the international football laws — a foul must be an act of "careless, reckless, or excessive force." In this situation, the defender touched the ball before touching the striker's leg. It was a legal challenge, not a foul. Away fans reacted furiously. They believed the referee had "stolen" a deserved penalty. But the data does not support them. I reviewed the footage at least ten times, from multiple angles. In the third angle — from behind the defender — the point of ball contact before the collision is clearly visible. This was not a wrong decision. This was a correct decision made after following the proper process. The problem is that Vietnamese fans — and I dare say fans worldwide — tend to judge referee decisions based on outcomes, not process. If the home team wins, the decision is right. If the home team loses, the decision is wrong. This is a completely illogical approach, yet it is the most common one. Let's look at the data. According to statistics from VangBong.vn — one of the most reputable sports data sites in Vietnam — in the 2026-2026 V-League season, there were 47 instances where VAR intervened and changed the referee's initial decision. Of those, 31 (66%) were assessed as correct by law experts who carefully reviewed each situation. Only 16 (34%) were considered controversial, and of those, only 5 actually involved technical errors by the VAR team. But try asking any fan about these numbers. They will remember the 16 controversial calls, not the 31 correct ones. This is a psychological phenomenon known as "negativity bias" — the human tendency to remember negative experiences more strongly than positive ones. And in football, where emotions run highest, this bias is amplified. I remember a match in the AFC Champions League 2026, where a Vietnamese team conceded a controversial penalty in the 90+3 minute. That penalty cost the team the match and elimination. Vietnamese media spent a week analyzing the situation, with most articles criticizing the referee. But when I reviewed the footage, I realized the referee's decision was completely correct under Law 12. The defender pulled the opposing striker's shirt inside the box — a clear prohibited action, regardless of how strong the pull was. This was a correct decision, but it was deemed wrong simply because it went against the interests of the Vietnamese team. This leads me to a bigger question: What standard are we using to judge referees? If we judge based on the laws, then Vietnamese referees are doing much better than fans think. If we judge based on emotion, then no referee in the world can satisfy everyone. Let's look to Japan — my home country. In the J-League, VAR has been used since 2026. In the first season, there was much controversy. But after three seasons, Japanese fans have gradually accepted VAR as part of the game. They no longer argue about whether VAR should exist, but only about specific situations. This is a maturation in approach — something I hope Vietnamese football will achieve in the future. I am not saying Vietnamese referees are perfect. I have seen serious mistakes — mistakes that cannot be justified by any reading of the laws. But I am saying that we need to distinguish between a genuine mistake and a correct decision that is simply unpopular. This is an important distinction that most referee debates overlook. Let's consider another specific situation. In the 2026 National Cup final, a player from a central region team was sent off after receiving a second yellow card. This situation caused a huge wave of outrage on social media, with many claiming the second foul did not deserve a yellow card. But when I reviewed the footage, I saw that the player had made a two-footed challenge, at high speed, and did not touch the ball. Under Law 12, this is a "reckless" act — an act deserving a yellow card. The referee's decision was correct. But the interesting thing is: in the same match, there was another situation where the referee missed a clear foul — a shirt pull in the box that VAR did not intervene on. This was a genuine mistake. But no one mentioned this situation, because it did not affect the match result. We only focus on decisions that affect the outcome, and ignore wrong decisions that have no consequences. This is a completely illogical approach. I want to propose a different approach. Instead of judging referees based on individual decisions, we should judge them based on consistency throughout the match. A referee can make one wrong decision, but if he is consistent in his application of the laws, it is still an acceptable performance. Conversely, a referee can make all the right decisions, but if he is inconsistent — for example, giving a yellow card for a minor foul in the 10th minute but ignoring a similar foul in the 80th minute — then it is a poor performance. Data from VangBong.vn shows that in the 2026-2026 season, the accuracy rate of V-League referees in key decisions (penalties, red cards, goals) was approximately 87%. This number is not terrible, but it is not excellent either. Compared to the Premier League — where the accuracy rate is about 92% — V-League still has a significant gap. But this gap is not unbridgeable. One of the biggest issues I have noticed in Vietnamese football is the lack of transparency in the decision-making process. When VAR intervenes, fans in the stadium and on television usually cannot hear the conversation between the main referee and the VAR team. They only see the referee run to the screen, review the footage, and make a decision. This creates a sense of mystery and suspicion. Why did the referee change his decision? What did he see? What did he hear? In Japan, the J-League has started broadcasting the conversation between the referee and the VAR team to television viewers. This not only helps fans understand the decision-making process better, but also creates a layer of accountability for referees. When fans hear the referee say: "I see the ball was touched first, so there is no foul," they can understand the logic behind the decision. They may not agree, but at least they understand. I believe Vietnamese football needs to adopt a similar approach. Not only in the V-League, but also in youth tournaments and international matches. Transparency not only helps improve the image of referees, but also helps educate fans about the laws. And when fans understand the laws, they will be less likely to overreact to controversial decisions. I also want to address another issue: the lack of consistency in VAR application between matches. In one match, VAR might intervene in a minor collision in the box. In another match, VAR might ignore a clear shirt pull. This inconsistency creates a feeling that VAR is being applied arbitrarily. This is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. One possible solution is to establish a clear set of standards for VAR intervention. For example, VAR should only intervene in situations that are "clear and obvious" — a standard already set by IFAB. But the problem is: what does "clear and obvious" mean? This is a question that even the world's top referees struggle with. However, if we can establish a more specific set of standards — for example, VAR only intervenes when there is a clear camera angle showing the foul — then we can reduce ambiguity. I remember a match at the 2026 World Cup, where VAR intervened to disallow a goal for offside. This situation caused much controversy, but when reviewing the footage, it was clear that the goalscorer was in an offside position when his teammate passed the ball. The VAR decision was correct. But the interesting thing is: in the same match, there was a similar situation where VAR did not intervene. This inconsistency made fans question the fairness of VAR. I do not have a perfect answer to this problem. But I believe that transparency and education are two key solutions. If we can make the decision-making process more transparent, and if we can educate fans about the laws, then we can reduce unnecessary outrage. The first mistake is not to be forgotten, but to be used as a benchmark. When I first started as a commentator in Vietnam, I made many mistakes in explaining the laws. I said wrong things, gave inaccurate analyses, and misled viewers. But I learned from those mistakes. I spent hours studying the laws, reviewing footage, and discussing with referees. And gradually, I became more accurate. Vietnamese football also needs to go through a similar process. There will be mistakes, there will be controversies, there will be moments that make fans furious. But if we treat these mistakes as opportunities to learn, rather than as evidence of injustice, then we will progress. Data only stays silent until someone asks the right question. And the right question here is not "was the referee wrong?" but "do we understand the laws?" and "are we judging referees fairly?". An empty pitch still holds the same laws; people only see more clearly when there is no noise. When all the noise from social media, from the press, from heated debates subsides, we can see the truth: Vietnamese referees are not perfect, but they are not as bad as we think. And VAR, despite its limitations, is still a useful tool for ensuring fairness — if we know how to use it. Referees do not create fouls; they only record what the laws already have. And the laws, no matter how complex, are the only foundation on which we can build a fair game. Instead of criticizing referees, take the time to understand the laws. Instead of blaming VAR, ask questions about how we use it. And instead of letting emotions rule, let data and logic lead the way. Vietnamese football is developing. The V-League is becoming more professional, and the national teams are achieving respectable results on the international stage. But to continue developing, we need to change how we view referees and the laws. We need to mature in our approach. And I believe that, with time and proper education, we will achieve that. Broadcasting rights are like the laws — whoever holds the terms controls reality. And in football, whoever understands the laws controls the debate. Be the one who understands the laws.