Sensors, AI and VAR: FIFA's bet on technology generates controversy at the World Cup

“What is happening is not fair,” he said. FIFA refereeing chief Pierluigi Collina said in an interview on Wednesday that he was pleased with the way things were going and in particular defended the decision to disallow Egypt's goal because of a foul in the play leading up to the goal. "There is no pre-established limit for the distance of the play in relation to the goal nor for the time elapsed until the completion of the play," said Collina. "We believe that a foul is a foul. Regardless of whether the foul seems 'obvious', if the referee did not see it on the pitch, VAR can intervene." The Video Assistant Referee (VAR) was created to correct errors considered clear and evident, such as the famous goal scored with the hand by Diego Maradona against England in the 1986 World Cup. The introduction of VAR in the World Cup faced resistance from Joseph Blatter when he was president of FIFA, but was quickly adopted by Infantino when he took office in 2016. There were 20 VAR interventions in the 64 games of the 2018 World Cup and less than 30 in the same number of matches in Qatar, in 2022. In the 2026 edition, these numbers were surpassed in the initial stages of the competition, which now features 104 games. FIFA expands the role of VAR The increase in interventions did not occur by chance. The expansion of the role of the four referees responsible for VAR is one of the pillars of the strategy adopted by Collina for this World Cup. In partnership with the International Football Association Board (IFAB), the body responsible for football rules, Collina expanded the situations in which VAR can intervene, adding four new review categories. Network science expert Brennan Klein said a future in which an ever-expanding network of cameras and artificial intelligence systems took over some of the refereeing decisions in real time — while possible — was unlikely, simply because fans appear increasingly unwilling to accept a greater level of technological intervention. "This kind of dystopian future, of excessive arbitration in everything, ends up not addressing the issue that motivated the initial intervention," Klein, who has been analyzing data throughout the tournament with his team at Northeastern University, told Reuters. "I get the impression that, by and large, the fans in the stadium just hate it. They've been told this is the right way to do things, but they haven't really had a say in the decision." "I think the fans seem to be voting with their boos." 'Abuse of technology' If the match between Croatia and Portugal had taken place at the 2014 World Cup, it would probably have ended in a 2-2 draw in regulation time. Josko Gvardiol scored in the 13th minute of stoppage time and tied the game for Croatia. However, VAR pointed out that the ball had touched Igor Matanovic before reaching the defender, which put a teammate in an irregular position. The touch could not be perceived with the naked eye nor did it visibly alter the ball's trajectory. Even so, a sensor installed in the equipment recorded the contact, possibly even with Matanovic's hair. "(The sensor) is capable of detecting even the slightest contact, providing referees with unprecedented information to make quick and accurate decisions," FIFA said in a social media post. Luka Modric, a Croatian who said goodbye to the World Cup after the 2-1 defeat, was not impressed with the decision. "Technology is useful in certain situations, but it is being used incorrectly or selectively, depending on the team involved or other factors," said the player. "If it's a clear error, intervention makes sense. But when the play is in a gray area and subject to interpretation, there's no reason to interfere." The Croatian Football Federation (HNS), which supports the use of VAR, sent a letter to FIFA asking for explanations about the decision and classifying the episode as "an abuse of technology".