The 2026 World Cup saw Scotland denied a penalty in a crucial group match against Morocco, sparking heated debate over a technology that was supposed to settle arguments, not start new ones. VAR — the Video Assistant Referee — is now a permanent fixture in top-level football, but its application remains a source of confusion and frustration for players, managers and fans alike.
In the Scotland vs Morocco match in Boston, midfielder Scott McTominay was tackled from behind by Morocco's Neil El Aynaoui inside the penalty area. Referee Ilgiz Tantashev waved play on, and VAR did not recommend a review. ITV's referee analyst Christina Unkel later argued that replays showed no contact on the ball and a clear trip on McTominay's left leg. "It is a very clear penalty in my opinion," she said. However, pundits Roy Keane and Ange Postecoglou disagreed, with Keane saying McTominay "was looking to go down".
“An explainer on VAR in football, using the Scotland vs Morocco penalty controversy as a case study.”
VAR was introduced in major leagues and tournaments from around 2017 to review clear and obvious errors by the referee. For penalties, VAR checks whether the referee missed a foul inside the box or made a wrong call on a handball, simulation or offside in the build-up. The system involves a dedicated referee watching multiple camera angles and advising the on-field referee via headset, who can then view the incident on a pitchside monitor before making a final decision.
But VAR does not review every incident — only those deemed a "clear and obvious error" by the on-field official. This threshold is often the source of disagreement. In the Scotland-Morocco case, VAR decided that El Aynaoui got a touch on the ball, making the tackle fair. Unkel and others argued that replays showed no such touch. The system is designed to correct howlers, not to re-referee the game, but critics say it still leaves room for subjective interpretation.
For UK football fans, VAR affects everything from Premier League matches to international tournaments. The technology has been broadly accepted for offside decisions — using semi-automated systems — but penalty calls remain contentious. A 2022 study found that VAR increased the number of penalties awarded but did not reduce controversy over those that were not given. English clubs and the national team have benefited from VAR reviews, but also been stung by them.
Key questions answered: Q: How does VAR work for penalty decisions? The VAR checks every goal, penalty incident and red card. If a potential penalty is missed, the VAR can recommend a review. The on-field referee watches the replay on a pitchside monitor and decides. If the initial decision is not a clear and obvious error, VAR will not intervene.
Q: Why was the Scotland penalty not given despite replays showing contact? VAR determined that Neil El Aynaoui touched the ball before making contact with McTominay, meaning the tackle was not a foul. However, some analysts and fans disputed that claim, highlighting the subjectivity involved in such decisions.
Q: Does VAR make football fairer? VAR reduces clear officiating errors, such as offside goals or missed fouls, but does not eliminate controversy. Decisions like the Scotland penalty remain subjective, and the system is only as good as the officials using it. Most leagues and tournaments continue to refine its use, but debates over threshold and consistency persist.
After the Scotland match, attention turned to the remaining group games. Scotland's World Cup hopes were knocked, but VAR debates are unlikely to disappear. The technology will be used throughout the tournament, with potential changes in future competitions focusing on transparency — such as releasing VAR audio — to help fans understand decisions better.