The Interactional Accomplishment of Refereeing Decisions in VAR Protocols

This study explores how on-field referees (REF) and Video Assistant Referees (VAR) collaboratively accomplish decision-making during in-match video review sequences in professional football. While VAR was introduced to increase accuracy and reduce error, discrepancies between the VAR's recommendation and the REF's final decision remain a persistent feature of match officiating. This paper investigates in detail these moments of agreement and disagreement, focusing on how shared decisions are sequentially organized, epistemically negotiated, and visually constructed in real time. Drawing on 107 official VAR recordings released by the Turkish Football Federation during the 2024–2025 Premier League season, the study employs an ethnomethodological and conversation analytic approach. Three episodes are analyzed in depth, one instance of agreement and two of disagreement, making available and accountable how decisions unfold through embodied actions, video-guided talk, and institutional protocols. The analysis reveals that even with shared access to identical video evidence, VAR and REF may interpret incidents differently due to divergent professional vision, distinct epistemic stances, and differing orientations to accountability. The study demonstrates that VAR reviews are not neutral, technocratic processes but complex interactional practices involving negotiated authority, contested categorizations, and moment-by-moment decision trajectories. The findings from the detailed sequential analysis challenge assumptions about the objectivity of video technology and emphasize the interactional work required to transform visual data into institutional decisions. By emphasizing the social organization of seeing, recommending, and deciding, this paper contributes to broader conversations in sport officiating, technology-mediated judgment, and the sociology of institutional interaction.