VAR: Are lengthy decisions ruining games as a spectacle?

Tammy Abraham thought he had scored a dream goal in his second Aston Villa start.

Four minutes after celebrating the goal, the goal was disallowed in a VAR review.

Aston Villa have good reason to be aggrieved.

Nineteen seconds is a long time to come back from having a goal disallowed in the Premier League. The ball was right next to the corner flag at the opposite end of the field.

Actually a very long time; The furthest VAR has ever gone in the attack phase.

Then there is the nature of the review itself. Did the VAR, namely Paul Tierney, have conclusive evidence that the ball had actually crossed the line?

Cast your mind to November 2023.

Newcastle United scored a goal against Arsenal and the goal was allowed to stand after a lengthy VAR review.

VAR deemed it had no evidence that Joe Willock had failed to keep the ball in play. Part of the problem was that there was no camera directly on the line to show the curvature of the ball relative to the line.

Can we say that Leon Bailey absolutely failed to keep the ball in?

It looked like the ball was probably out. But it probably shouldn’t have been enough for VAR to disallow the goal.

Aston Villa boss Unai Emery said after the match: “I have to accept the referee’s decision but I don’t think it’s fair.” he said.

You can see his point. Even Brentford boss Keith Andrews said he had “seen no definitive evidence”.

But Andrews added: “It’s the million-dollar question [if fair to call it back so far] but it’s the same stage of the game. I’m comfortable.”

Danny Murphy felt the decision highlighted how far VAR had strayed from the game.

“If you’re Aston Villa and the opposite happened to you, then you say the ball is out of play,” Murphy said.

“But this goes back to what I said in the first place: Is it about making the right decisions, or is it about the good of the game?”

Is it the right decision? Probably.

Is it right for VAR to intervene? Probably not.