Liverpool support VAR’s continued use in the English Premier League next season despite calls from Wolves to scrap it.
The PA news agency understands the Reds want the system to continue and improve.
That is despite the club being on the wrong end of one of the highest-profile officiating errors of the season, when a Luis Diaz goal at Tottenham in October was wrongly ruled out after miscommunication between on-field referee Simon Hooper and VAR Darren England.
Another top-flight club have also indicated their support for VAR when contacted by PA, but wished not to be named at this stage.
A further unnamed club said they would not vote to scrap VAR, citing the inconsistency it would create for those teams playing in Europe, and that it would amount to five years’ investment going down the drain.
READ MORE: Joe Hart prepares for the future beyond Celtic as he secures new role
The early expressions of backing for VAR follow Wolves submitting a resolution on Wednesday calling for a vote to scrap the system at the league’s annual general meeting.
Wolves’ supporters trust has also called on fans of other teams to lobby their clubs in an effort to scrap it.
“VAR has taken the enjoyment out of the game we all know and love with such little benefit,” the Wolves 1877 Supporters Trust said in a post on its X account.
“We now back all supporters trusts of Premier League clubs to come together to ensure their clubs vote in favour of removing VAR and giving us back our game.”
READ MORE: Scotland's Euro 2024 opponents name squad for upcoming tournament
Meanwhile, PA understands there will be no discussion or vote among Championship clubs about introducing VAR into the second tier next season.
Witnessing the Premier League’s experience is understood to be a factor that has contributed to a collective lack of enthusiasm among Championship clubs, along with cost considerations.
The Football Supporters’ Association posted details of its summer 2023 survey on Thursday morning, which included questions to the respondents around attitudes to VAR.
It found only one in 20 (5.5 per cent) of fans who had experienced VAR in stadiums rated their experience of it as good or very good.
Almost two-thirds (63.3 per cent) were against its continued use, with 91.9 per cent criticising the length of time taken to make decisions and 95 per cent saying the removal of spontaneity from goal celebrations was a chief concern.
The Premier League says it fully supports the continued use of VAR but acknowledges the need for improvements.
The league’s chief football officer Tony Scholes admitted in February that the in-stadium experience of VAR was “nowhere near good enough”.
The league is set to trial a protocol seen at last summer’s Women’s World Cup where referees communicate the final outcome of a VAR review to fans in the stadium.
READ MORE: Fletcher Boyd Aberdeen fairytale shows pathway is there for youngsters
Scholes said the league was also “on a journey” towards being able to broadcast live audio. Currently the laws of the game forbid it, but the league is working with the International Football Association Board (IFAB) to progress the issue.
Clubs also voted to introduce semi-automated offside technology (SAOT) in the autumn, which league sources say will speed up the average VAR check for offside by 31 seconds.
The league also points to the greater number of correct decisions since VAR’s introduction. In the final season before it came in, 2018-19, the league said 82 per cent of ‘key match incident’ decisions were correct. That figure with VAR assistance is now 96 per cent.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here