UEFA referees’ chief Roberto Rosetti has criticised what he describes as excessive and over-technical use of video assistant referee (VAR) reviews, saying some checks are “not connected with football” and urging officials to prioritise clear, obvious errors and faster processes.
- UEFA referees' chief Roberto Rosetti criticised excessive VAR use, calling some reviews "not connected with football."
- UEFA launched Clear Line, a public portal with video examples explaining when VAR should intervene.
- Rosetti wants fewer, faster interventions and a return to on-field refereeing for clear and obvious errors.
- He cited differing VAR and handball statistics across competitions to illustrate inconsistency.
- No rule changes were announced; Clear Line is intended as an educational reference and to promote common practice.
What Rosetti said and what UEFA launched
Speaking as he launched Clear Line, a new UEFA portal that shows video examples of incidents VAR covers, Rosetti said referees should avoid “microscopic situations” and keep the match referee central to decisions. He emphasised context and natural match speed are important when assessing incidents and warned long, repetitive reviews risk undermining VAR’s credibility.
Rosetti said the aim of Clear Line is to create a public library explaining when VAR will intervene — covering penalties, red cards, attacking offences, factual decisions and mistaken identity — so clubs, players and supporters can compare incidents with standardised examples. He described the tool as “a guide for all the people of football” rather than a resource for officials.
Key concerns: frequency, time and consistency
Rosetti highlighted three linked problems arising from current VAR practice:
- Too many interventions: He said there are “too many reviews” and that an increase in interventions can change player behaviour as they attempt to draw decisions.
- Lengthy reviews: Rosetti suggested checks that last more than 90 seconds risk “losing credibility,” and said he favours simpler review sequences — for example a freeze-frame for point of contact followed by half-speed and full-speed footage — rather than multiple repeat replays.
- Inconsistent interpretations between competitions: Rosetti acknowledged leagues apply laws differently, citing ongoing disagreement over handball. He pointed out the Champions League had a higher intervention rate than most domestic leagues in 2025–26 and noted the Premier League had the lowest VAR intervention rate at 0.29 per game compared with 0.47 per game in the Champions League.
Why this matters for clubs, fans and referees
The debate touches on several practical issues. First, match flow and fan experience can be affected by frequent or protracted stoppages. Second, inconsistent application across leagues and competitions creates confusion: Rosetti pointed to differing handball interpretations, with the Premier League showing a lower frequency of handball penalties compared with other big leagues in the 2025–26 season.
Third, the balance of decision-making between on-field referees and VAR feeds into perceptions of authority and accountability. Rosetti called for referees to have “personality” and make on-pitch decisions, with VAR intervening only for “clear and obvious” errors — language that echoes earlier guidance around the original purpose of VAR.
What Clear Line contains
UEFA’s Clear Line site offers video examples across the five categories VAR covers. Rosetti framed it as educational: a structure and document that explains when and how VAR will intervene, intended for fans, clubs and players to consult after matches to compare incidents to the library examples.
Evidence and figures cited by Rosetti
Rosetti cited comparative intervention rates from the 2025–26 season to underline inconsistency: the Premier League at 0.29 VAR interventions per game, the Champions League at 0.47 per game. He also referenced handball penalty frequencies across major European leagues, listing roughly one handball penalty every 17.27 Premier League games, 10.93 in the Bundesliga, 10.56 in La Liga, 10.00 in Serie A and 9.27 in Ligue 1; in the Champions League Rosetti said a handball penalty came about every seven games.
Points of tension and unresolved issues
Rosetti conceded that reaching a uniform approach across competitions will be difficult because national leagues and competitions tend to interpret laws differently. He acknowledged perceptions differ — “The perception about handball in England is different,” he said — and that football will continue to see incidents interpreted variously across jurisdictions.
Where there is disagreement between leagues and UEFA, Rosetti and the meeting he held with the lead referee officers from England, Spain, Germany, France and Italy aim to narrow those gaps, but he did not set out a timetable or binding mechanism to enforce uniformity.
What comes next
UEFA has made Clear Line available publicly and is encouraging stakeholders to use it as a reference point after matches. Rosetti said a new collective protocol was agreed for on-field reviews with a prescribed sequence of camera speeds to be shown when referees consult the pitch-side monitor, intended to speed up decision-making and reduce replay overload.
Rosetti also said UEFA wants VAR used only where there is a clear and obvious error, returning referees to the centre of decision-making. He did not announce rule changes or sanctions for leagues that apply laws differently; his comments and the Clear Line resource seek to influence practice and understanding rather than legislate new rules.
Timeline — recent steps on VAR and refereeing
- 2025–26 season: Comparative VAR intervention-rate data cited by Rosetti (Premier League 0.29 interventions/game; Champions League 0.47).
- July 2026: Rosetti meets lead referee officers from England, Spain, Germany, France and Italy and launches Clear Line, a public portal outlining VAR application examples and a proposed on-field-review sequence.
Practical implications for Premier League and Champions League viewers
For spectators and clubs, the immediate practical change is informational: Clear Line offers a reference to evaluate incidents against UEFA’s examples. Match officials in UEFA competitions will be encouraged to follow the new, streamlined on-field review protocol; domestic leagues may or may not adopt identical practices.
Fans should expect calls from UEFA for fewer, quicker VAR interventions and explanations for decisions that closely match the Clear Line examples. Whether this reduces the number or length of VAR checks will depend on domestic competition refereeing departments and any subsequent enforcement or consensus built among leagues.
Why G3.Football readers should care
VAR interventions shape game outcomes, viewing experience and tactical behaviour. Rosetti’s intervention signals UEFA is attempting to recalibrate VAR toward clearer, faster decisions and to provide a shared reference point for spectators. For Premier League and Champions League audiences — who Rosetti singled out with comparative statistics — the debate could change how crucial incidents are handled as the season unfolds.