I'm curious to read what form you (and others) think this modernisation would take. We can all agree that the subjective element of many football decisions make them incompatible with video refereeing where other sports have objective decisions that are better suited, like tennis line calls. One "evolution" we have seen with VAR was an explosion in handball penalties, because whereas the traditional method gave the ref some leeway in deciding whether the hand really affected anything or was done with intent, now you had someone who is only thinking "what might the ref have not seen", meaning that any incident of ball striking hand became a penalty. As things became increasingly farcical, the authorities tried to relitigate on the fly, and now it's just a mess where some get penalised for having the ball blasted at them from a foot away, and others are allowed to play basketball. So what rule change can resolve this situation? I imagine it would have to be with strict objective criteria - VAR can only work if all rules in its remit are objective. But handball has never worked that way. So what is the answer?
The above is one of many instances of how I think VAR has led to worse decision making. I see that many in the last few pages argue that VAR can lead to better outcomes than no-VAR if run by better people, and I can see how that might seem self-evident, but I actually disagree. As Stewy hints at in this post, you'd have to fundamentally alter the laws of the game to turn this assumption into fact. Do we want a whole new book of laws?
Finally, I agree with those who have said it would be better to withdraw VAR while working on its flaws, than to ruin another season with more trial and error. It doesn't have to be a permanent scrapping, but it needs to be rebuilt from the ground up before reinserting. I think you're kidding yourself if you think a new group of people can be subbed in and everything will just click.
I'd say rules need simplifying.
Offside rule has been a nightmare with VAR. Firstly because it's changed what is considered offside compared to before and also because of all the intricacies around the rule. For example, Van Dijk's goal in the cup final (Endo 'interfering') or Salah being pushed into an offside position and then having the goal overturned for it at Burnley. These are nonsensical things that would never have been even looked at pre-VAR, but everything has to be so literal. Whereas sides like Arsenal constantly dance around the rules and get away with it.
Offsides - Therefore you could simplify it so that (as an example) you're offside only if all the foot is offside and that is basically it (at least as far as the bar for a VAR overturn). People are then satisfied that if a goal is disallowed it's a clear decision. Either that or have thicker lines at least. You could have one other scenario where a defender is deliberately blocking the goalkeeper because players will cheat and take advantage of anything. Then you can have a VAR system to check that - otherwise have the semi-automated/automated system to check whether all the foot was offside. The offside rule has gone so far from its original purpose, magnified more by VAR.
Handball - it's been a minefield since VAR came in and it's applied differently in different competitions. I'd say deliberate handball in the area - penalty. Arm in an unnatural position - indirect free kick. Otherwise - leave it. From a VAR point of view only overturn to give pen if it's determined to be a deliberate handball.
That's where you need slight rule changes.
The problem is a foul in the box is always going to be subjective. Give VAR the remit to overturn a clear dive in the box (i.e. blatant cheating) and that's it. Consequence of VAR has been more and more pens and there's too many of them. The ref is fudging making decisions because of VAR - the ref needs to decide if it's a pen. Same with a goal, you can't have goals ruled out by VAR for a subjective foul in the build up. The ref has to make that decision. If the VAR can't decide that Doku on Mac is a pen - and is backed on it - then why bother giving it the remit to give penalties for anything but deliberate handball?
And then red cards. Another minefield is what's violent conduct and what isn't. The Jones one from VAR was a joke or the Calvert Lewin one for Everton in the cup. VAR should only be overturning over the really bad ones. And also to overturn a red card that was given - like Mac Allister at Bournemouth which they didn't bother doing.
It needs simplifying and streamlining to work. If the above was all applied then it's far less disruptive to fans but guards more against the howlers which was how VAR was sold anyway.
With all that attacking sides benefit from the offside changes and the defensive sides benefit from less penalties.
