This page explains how TheVarVerdict selects match incidents for review. Our goal is consistent, evidence-based coverage that prioritizes
public interest, clarity, and reliable sourcing — not speculation.
What we mean by “incident”
An “incident” is a specific refereeing decision or VAR moment within a match that can be reviewed using publicly available information
(video evidence, official protocol, and reputable reporting). We focus on the decision itself and how it relates to the Laws of the Game
and competition VAR protocol.
Core criteria for publishing a review
- Impact: The decision is match-relevant (e.g., goal, penalty, red card, crucial offside/handball, major disciplinary moment).
-
Protocol relevance: The incident raises a clear question about VAR scope (e.g., “clear and obvious,” review threshold,
second yellow limitations, offside phase-of-play). - Evidence quality: There is sufficient publicly available footage or descriptions to explain what happened without guessing.
- Source reliability: We can cite official documents (e.g., IFAB Laws, competition rules) and/or reputable journalism for context.
- Reader value: The review can teach something useful (rules, protocol, interpretation, or recurring pattern) beyond the headline.
What we prioritize
Decision types
- Penalty decisions and penalty overturns
- Direct red cards and VAR red-card checks
- Offside decisions leading to goals (including build-up/phase issues)
- Handball decisions (especially in the penalty area)
- Goals disallowed for fouls in the attacking phase
- High-profile VAR/communication controversies where protocol is central
Competitions
We cover a range of competitions. When multiple incidents happen on the same day, we prioritize based on impact, protocol importance,
and availability of reliable sources.
What we do not publish
- Unverified rumors or anonymous claims without reliable supporting evidence
- Personal attacks against referees, players, coaches, or fans
- Accusations about integrity, motives, or “fixing” without official confirmation
- Doxxing or private information about individuals
- Misleading edits or out-of-context clips presented as proof
How we handle uncertainty
Football decisions can be subjective, and footage quality can vary. If we cannot confirm a key detail, we label it as
Not publicly confirmed. Where multiple interpretations are reasonable, we describe the alternatives and explain why
the call may be considered “debatable” rather than presenting certainty.
Updates and follow-ups
If a league, federation, referee body, or official source later clarifies an incident, we may update the article and note the change.
For factual corrections, see our Corrections Policy.
Related pages