VAR: Are lengthy decisions ruining games as a spectacle?

Tammy Abraham thought he had a dream goal on his second debut for Aston Villa.

Four minutes after he had celebrated the goal it was ruled out on a VAR review.

Aston Villa have good reason to feel aggrieved.

Nineteen seconds is a long time to go back to disallow a goal in the Premier League. The ball was right by the corner flag at the opposite end of the pitch.

A very long time in fact – the furthest the VAR has ever gone back in the attacking phase.

Then there is the nature of the review itself. Did the VAR, Paul Tierney, really have conclusive proof the whole of the ball was over the line?

Cast your mind back to November 2023.

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

The VAR felt he did not have proof that Joe Willock had failed to keep the ball in play. Part of the problem was there was no camera directly on the line to show the curvature of the ball relative to the line.

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

It looks like the ball was probably out. But probably shouldn’t be enough for the VAR to rule out the goal.

“I have to accept the referee’s decision but I think it isn’t fair,” Aston Villa boss Unai Emery said after the game.

You can see his point. Even Brentford boss Keith Andrews said he had not “seen conclusive proof”.

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

Danny Murphy felt the decision emphasised his point on how much VAR takes away from the game.

“If you are Aston Villa, and that happened to you the other way round, then you would be saying the ball had gone out of play,” Murphy said.

“But it goes back to what I originally said. Is it about getting the right decisions, or is it about the good of the game?”

Correct decision? Probably.

Correct for the VAR to intervene? Probably not.