A check is automatic. A review is not.

The rule and version used here

This page applies The IFAB Laws of the Game 2026/27, Law 5 and the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) protocol, sections 1–4. The edition took effect on 1 July 2026. IFAB Circular no. 32 allowed a competition that started before then to adopt the changes early or delay them until no later than the start of its next competition.

VAR is not part of every match. Under Law 5, the organiser must meet the VAR Handbook implementation requirements and have FIFA's written permission. Competition rules also determine whether the optional corner provision and public referee announcements are used.

What VAR can—and cannot—check

Section 2 of the 2026/27 protocol permits assistance in these categories:

1. Goal/no goal: whether a goal was scored and relevant attacking offences or the ball going out in the build-up.
2. Penalty/no penalty: a wrongly awarded or missed penalty, the location of the offence, and relevant attacking offences or the ball going out before the incident.
3. Red card: DOGSO, whether a challenge is serious foul play rather than reckless, violent conduct, biting, spitting, offensive, insulting or abusive actions, and a clearly incorrect second caution that resulted in a red card.
4. Mistaken identity: correcting which player committed an offence for which a yellow or red card was shown.
5. Clearly incorrect corner award: only where the competition has adopted the option and the decision can be changed immediately without delaying the restart.

An ordinary free kick, throw-in, first yellow card or missed second-yellow offence is not a stand-alone review category. A caution can still be given or cancelled as the proper disciplinary consequence of reviewing an incident that is within scope.

How a VAR check becomes a ruling

1. Make an on-field decision. The officials decide as if VAR were absent; allowing play to continue is itself a decision. A serious incident that nobody saw is the exception.
2. Test the category. If the incident is outside the five categories, VAR cannot create jurisdiction merely because the replay looks persuasive.
3. Check the permitted period. For a goal, penalty incident or DOGSO red card, this can include the attacking phase that led directly to it.
4. Apply the threshold. The footage must indicate a probable clear and obvious error or serious missed incident before the VAR recommends a review.
5. Choose the review route. Subjective judgments usually call for an on-field review; a factual correction is usually handled from VAR information, although the referee may still view it.
6. Give the final decision. Only the referee initiates the review and makes the ruling, shows the television signal, takes or changes any disciplinary action, and orders the restart required by the Laws.

Most checks are silent

The VAR automatically checks the available footage for every potential or actual goal, penalty or red-card decision/incident and case of mistaken identity. If nothing indicates a clear and obvious error or serious missed incident, the check usually ends without a conversation with the referee. This is why a broadcaster can display “check complete” without the referee visiting the monitor.

If the footage indicates a probable error within scope, the VAR informs the referee. The referee then decides whether to initiate a review. The finger-to-ear signal means information is being received and the restart is being held; the rectangular television signal marks a formal review or a decision changed on video information.

Facts and judgments use replay differently

The IFAB protocol says slow motion should generally establish facts such as player or offence position, point of contact, and whether the ball left the field. Normal speed should generally be used to assess the intensity of a challenge or whether an action amounts to handball.

For a factual question, such as whether contact occurred inside the penalty area, a VAR-only review is usually appropriate. For a subjective question, such as the intensity of a tackle, offside interference or handball considerations, an on-field review is appropriate. These are procedural preferences, not a transfer of authority: the referee always owns the final decision.

The look-back is connected to the decisive incident

For a goal, penalty/no-penalty incident or DOGSO red card, section 4 permits review of the attacking phase that led directly to the decision, including how the attacking team gained possession in open play. A relevant offside, handball, foul or ball-out decision can therefore undo the later goal or penalty.

The protocol does not set one universal number of seconds or passes. It also does not authorise an unlimited search through unrelated earlier play. The question is whether the earlier event falls within the reviewable attacking phase leading directly to the decision under examination.

A legal restart normally closes the review window

If play has stopped and restarted, the referee normally may not review the earlier incident. The protocol preserves narrow exceptions for mistaken identity and a potential sending-off offence involving violent conduct, spitting, biting or extremely offensive, insulting or abusive action. In those exceptions the referee may review and impose the appropriate disciplinary sanction after the restart.

If play continues while an incident is checked, later misconduct does not simply disappear when the original decision is changed. The protocol retains disciplinary action from that later period, except a caution or sending-off specifically for stopping or interfering with a promising attack or for DOGSO.

VAR can remove a clearly wrong red, not find a missed yellow

The 2026/27 change is deliberately narrow. If the referee shows a second caution and therefore a red card, VAR may intervene when that second caution is clearly incorrect. If the referee misses a merely cautionable offence that would have been the player's second yellow, VAR may not recommend a review just to produce the dismissal.

This does not stop VAR intervening where the same incident independently meets another category—for example, if the challenge may itself be serious foul play and therefore a straight-red offence.

The identity can be fixed without retrying the whole call

Where the referee penalises an offence but clearly identifies the wrong player and shows that player a yellow or red card, VAR may correct the offender's identity. Under section 2(d), only identity is reviewed unless the offence itself also belongs to the goal, penalty or red-card categories.

The 2026/27 amendment covers a player of either team being wrongly identified. That can matter where the referee has attributed the offence to the wrong team as well as the wrong individual; the disciplinary record and the restart must then reflect the corrected offence.

A quick corner can close the new option

For 2026/27, a competition may authorise VAR to correct a corner that was clearly awarded incorrectly. IFAB says the correction must be immediate and must not delay the restart. The option also covers a corner wrongly awarded when the ball actually went out over the touchline.

If the corner is taken quickly, it cannot be changed. The provision is not a general review of every goal-kick, throw-in or missed corner, and it does not apply unless the competition has adopted it. If video information changes the award, the referee must show the television signal.

The 2026 World Cup pre-kick rule was not the universal baseline

On 31 May 2026, IFAB announced a clarification for the FIFA World Cup 2026 covering certain clear attacking-team offences committed before the ball was in play at an attacking corner or free kick, where the offence directly affected a goal, penalty or disciplinary sanction. If confirmed at an on-field review, the appropriate discipline applied and the kick was retaken.

IFAB said this clarification would be reviewed after the tournament before any wider application. It should therefore not be assumed for another competition merely because that match uses VAR; the appointed competition protocol must expressly include it.

A foul in the move before a goal

Situation: Blue wins possession by clearly fouling Red, keeps the same attacking phase and scores. The referee allowed play to continue because the foul was missed.

IFAB 2026/27 ruling: the goal can be reviewed and disallowed. The decisive fact is that the attacking-team offence occurred in the phase leading directly to the goal; play restarts according to the offence.

Contact is outside the penalty area

Situation: the referee awards a penalty for a trip, but replay conclusively places the contact just outside the penalty area.

IFAB 2026/27 ruling: VAR may provide the factual location and the referee changes the penalty to a direct free kick at the offence location. The reviewable fact is inside versus outside, not a fresh search for unrelated fouls.

A missed second-yellow tackle

Situation: a player already on a caution commits another reckless, but not serious-foul-play, challenge. The referee misses it completely.

IFAB 2026/27 ruling: no VAR intervention solely to give the second caution. The protocol corrects a clearly wrong second caution that has been shown; it does not make an unseen cautionable offence reviewable.

The corner is taken before it can be corrected

Situation: replay clearly shows that the attacker last touched the ball, but the referee awards a corner and the attacking team takes it immediately.

IFAB 2026/27 ruling: even in a competition using the optional corner provision, the award cannot now be changed. Immediate correction without delaying the restart is an express condition of the option.

Why did VAR leave the decision alone?

• “The replay looks wrong.” The incident may be outside a reviewable category, or the evidence may not make the original judgment clearly and obviously wrong.
• “The referee did not use the monitor.” A silent check may have confirmed the decision, or a factual matter may have been resolved through a VAR-only review.
• “A player asked for a review.” Players and coaches have no challenge right; only the referee can initiate a review.
• “VAR cannot issue yellow cards.” A first yellow is not its own category, but the referee may take the correct disciplinary action after reviewing an incident that is within scope.
• “There must be a time limit.” The protocol requires efficiency but sets no maximum review time because accuracy takes priority.

Governing-body sources and effective version

• The IFAB — Laws of the Game 2026/27, Video Assistant Referee (VAR) protocol, sections 1–4 and FAQs
• The IFAB — Changes to the Laws of the Game 2026/27, VAR protocol amendments
• The IFAB — Circular no. 32 (2026), effective date and 2026/27 VAR changes
• The IFAB — FIFA World Cup 2026 clarification for attacking-team offences before the ball is in play (31 May 2026)

Checked on 26 August 2026 against the IFAB 2026/27 live protocol, the 2026/27 amendment text and Circular no. 32. The baseline applies only to authorised VAR matches; competition rules may govern adoption timing, the optional corner check, public announcements and approved trials.