The final whistle in any close football match often brings a mix of emotions, but for those watching Newcastle United’s dramatic clash with Arsenal, the overriding feeling was one of confusion and debate.
The match had everything: late goals, high stakes, and a heavy dose of controversy, much of it swirling around the ever-present and increasingly divisive Video Assistant Referee system.
While fans of both teams will argue about specific incidents for weeks, the discussion has now reached a national level, with prominent voices in the sport expressing their deep frustration with the state of officiating.
Among those voices is Gary Lineker, the respected former England striker and host of the popular BBC show “Match of the Day.” Speaking candidly on his podcast, “The Rest Is Football,” Lineker did not hold back in his assessment of how VAR impacted the game at St. James’ Park.
His comments went beyond a simple complaint about a single call; they represented a fundamental critique of the system as it currently operates in the Premier League.
The match featured several key moments that were subjected to VAR review. The most significant was a first-half incident where Arsenal was initially awarded a penalty after a collision between Newcastle goalkeeper Nick Pope and striker Viktor Gyokeres.
After a lengthy delay, the decision was overturned, with the officials determining that Pope had managed to get a touch on the ball first. Discussing this specific moment, Lineker acknowledged that the final outcome was probably correct.
He noted that Pope did make contact with the ball and that Gyokeres seemed to exaggerate the subsequent contact.
However, Lineker’s main argument is that the process itself is flawed. He pointed out that if the initial penalty call had stood in the days before VAR, the controversy would have been minimal and short-lived.
The problem, as he sees it, is that VAR cannot win in its current format. The system was introduced to correct clear and obvious errors, but the definition of what constitutes such an error seems to shift from one week to the next.
Lineker expressed a sentiment felt by many fans, stating that the constant, inconsistent interventions are making the game almost unwatchable. He is bored of saying it, and fans are bored of hearing it.
“The bar for intervention changes constantly,” Lineker seemed to suggest. “One week it’s a high bar, then it’s a low bar, then it’s a slightly lower bar.
We were told this wasn’t about re-refereeing the game, but that is exactly what is happening. They are going back and analyzing every minor detail, which destroys the flow and the raw emotion that makes football so special.”
But Lineker didn’t just stop at identifying the problem; he proposed a concrete solution. He passionately argued that the only way to salvage the situation and make VAR a useful tool rather than a source of constant anger is to implement an appeal system, similar to those used in sports like cricket and tennis.
In this model, each team would be allocated a limited number of appeals per half. If a manager believes a crucial decision has been missed, they could signal for a review, stipulating exactly what incident they want checked.
This approach, Lineker believes, would solve several issues at once. It would put the power of review partially in the hands of the teams, who are best positioned to know which moments are truly game-changing.
It would drastically reduce the number of stoppages, as officials would no longer be checking every single corner, free-kick, or potential foul in the background.
The game would regain its natural rhythm, and the celebrations for a goal would return to being spontaneous moments of joy, not anxious waits for a green light from a remote official.
His closing words were a stark warning. Without a fundamental change like an appeal system, he fears VAR is on a path to “destroying the game.” It’s a powerful statement from one of English football’s most prominent figures, and it echoes the frustrations of millions.
The conversation started by a dramatic match in Newcastle is no longer just about a penalty that was or wasn’t given; it’s about the very soul of the sport and how it is governed. The call for change is growing louder, and the authorities would be wise to listen.
