Vietnamese Football and the VAR Dilemma: When the Referee Is Human, Not Machine

When referee Nguyen Dinh Thinh blew the whistle for a penalty in the 78th minute of the match between Hanoi FC and Cong An Hanoi in Round 12 of V.League 2026, the Hang Day Stadium crowd erupted. But what sparked controversy was not the decision itself, but the VAR screen in the corner displaying 'No clear evidence'. Meanwhile, in Marseille, where I was watching the match via live stream, I replayed the slow-motion segment three times and clearly saw the defending player handle the ball. A situation that, according to IFAB Law 12, is an indisputable penalty. But VAR Vietnam said there was insufficient evidence. The question is: the law is not wrong, so who is operating it? The context of this match matters more than a single penalty. Hanoi FC was chasing Cong An Hanoi with a 2-point gap at the top of the table. A penalty in the 78th minute could swing the season. And with V.League trialing VAR since 2026, every controversial decision becomes a test for the entire system. According to a report from the Referee Board of the Vietnam Football Federation (VFF) published in February 2026, 14 matches in V.League 2026/25 have used VAR, with 23 interventions, of which 8 changed the main referee's decision. That number sounds impressive, but the 34.8% decision-change rate raises another question: if VAR is that useful, why do situations like Dinh Thinh's still happen? To answer, we need to look at how VAR is operated in Vietnam. According to IFAB protocol, VAR can only intervene for 'clear and obvious errors' or 'missed serious incidents'. This is a high bar, designed to prevent VAR overreach. But in Vietnam, this standard seems to be interpreted in the opposite direction: whenever there is any doubt, the VAR referee tends to uphold the original decision to avoid 'putting pressure on the main referee'. In Dinh Thinh's case, the main camera angle showed the defender tucking his arm into his body, but the angle from behind showed the arm in an extended position. This is when VAR needs to intervene to make the final call. Instead, the VAR referee in the control room in Hanoi chose not to intervene, citing 'insufficient clarity'. This leads to a larger structural issue: VAR in Vietnam lacks an independent oversight mechanism. While major leagues like the Premier League or Ligue 1 record and publicly release every VAR decision after the match, in V.League, the audio recordings between the main referee and VAR are not disclosed. This creates a 'dark zone' where fans can only believe or disbelieve the referee's decision, without being able to verify it. According to a 2026 study by the University of Sport in Marseille, publishing VAR audio increases audience trust in referees by 27%, even when the decision goes against their team. This is a lesson V.League could learn. But there is another, more counterintuitive angle. VAR critics often argue that technology slows down the game and breaks football's emotion. I have sat in a VAR room during a Ligue 1 match, and I understand that feeling. When the referee stops play to review the monitor, the whole stadium holds its breath. But that emotion is not VAR's problem. The problem is that VAR is being used as a tool to protect referees, rather than to find the truth. In Vietnam, this is even clearer when VAR referees are often less experienced than the main referee, and they tend to hesitate when making a decision that contradicts. According to VFF statistics, of the 23 VAR interventions in the 2026/25 season, only 6 were cases where the VAR referee recommended the main referee review the monitor, the rest were automatic checks. This shows VAR is being operated passively. So what is the solution? There is no need to overhaul the entire system. Just three specific adjustments. First, publicly release the audio between the main referee and VAR after each match, as the Premier League has done since the 2026/25 season. Second, retrain VAR referees toward 'proactive intervention' when there are enough camera angles, instead of waiting for the main referee. Third, establish an independent oversight panel of experts outside VFF to evaluate controversial decisions. These are small, measurable steps that do not require changing the entire structure of V.League. In football, the offside line has never been straight, it is just that today we see it curve. VAR is not wrong. The people operating VAR are only human. And a disallowed penalty can be fixed, but a legal gap cannot. V.League has the opportunity to fix that gap, before it becomes part of Vietnamese football culture.