Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The elite football refereeing role is influenced by technological developments in sport, most recently by the implementation of Video Assistant Referee (VAR). However, technological innovations such as VAR are most-often implemented in men's elite football, where women are underrepresented as referees. Traditionally, elite football refereeing is rooted in gendered practices favoring men and masculinity. We utilize an analytical framework combining Goffman's dramaturgical approach with hegemonic masculinity to examine the ways in which gendered practices of football refereeing are challenged, redefined, or reproduced through the integration of VAR technology. Methodologically the study is based on 23 interviews with elite referees and instructors taking part in VAR training prior to the inaugural VAR-season in Norway. The findings show that although the implementation of VAR challenges and changes how elite refereeing is practiced, the gendered practices favoring men and masculinity are largely reproduced. The analysis illustrates how the changing refereeing practices following the introduction of VAR are intertwined with performances of masculinity, reinforcing the belief that men are best suited to serve as elite referees. Further, practices of hegemonic masculinity are perpetuated by VAR being embedded within the refereeing role. The implementation of VAR in elite football demonstrates how gender and technology may intertwine in ways that yield ambiguous outcomes, which there is a need for future studies to examine.

Keywords

football refereeing VAR sport and gender sports technology technological innovation

Introduction

Enhancing justice and fair play is one of the main functions of technology in sport. This rationale underpins all sports technologies designed for sports refereeing and officiating, of which the implementation of Video Assistant Referee (VAR) in football is no exception. Since the introduction of VAR in major European leagues and championships several studies have investigated how this technological innovation impacts fairness and outcomes of football matches, by for instance limiting biased decisions and mistakes (Errekagorri et al., 2020; Gasparetto & Loktionov, 2023; Holder et al., 2021). However, there is less focus on how the implementation and use of VAR impacts the refereeing role in football. One of the most prominent examples of how VAR changes the practices of football refereeing is that the introduction of VAR increases the number of referees needed for each football match. Prior to the implementation of VAR each elite match required four on-field referees (head referee, two assistant referees and a fourth official). After the implementation of VAR each football match now consists of at least seven individuals (four on-field and three in the VAR room).¹ In short, football refereeing with and without VAR is two distinct ventures (Skirbekk, 2025).

Like many leadership positions in sport, football refereeing is a sphere dominated by men (Kim & Hong, 2016; Reid & Dallaire, 2019). Especially in men's elite football, there are few women referees (Cunningham et al., 2024; Jones & Edwards, 2013). This is problematic as refereeing men's elite football is seen as more prestigious than refereeing women's elite football, and additionally, refereeing men's matches often pay substantially more than women's matches (Skirbekk, 2023). In this way, gender inequity in elite football refereeing is a long-standing social issue in the international working life of sports.

Just like in sports refereeing women are similarly underrepresented in the sports technology industry, for instance as entrepreneurs in sports tech startups (Tjønndal et al., 2025). Hence, both the development and the use of sports technology are gendered. In the case of football refereeing, VAR is predominantly used in men's elite league football, where men largely oversee its application and interpretation. A notable exception to this is the use of VAR in international women's tournaments like the World Cup (2019 and 2023) and European Championships (2022). Still, the underrepresentation of women in sports tech and sports leadership positions shape the design, implementation and governance of technological innovations in football and other sports. Therefore, technological innovations like VAR are not gender neutral as they are always developed by someone, for someone. Because technology is often developed by men for men (Fox et al., 2006), it remains closely associated with men and masculinity (Wajcman et al., 2020). This presents potential challenges for women referees as the expanding use of technologies like VAR in football occurs against a backdrop of palpable gender disparities—not just in terms of the abovementioned representation scarcity of women referees (Reid & Dallaire, 2019), but also in areas of abuse (Grubb et al., 2023), career opportunities, and organizational support (Wicker et al., 2024).

By examining VAR through a gender lens, we can understand how this technological innovation works to exacerbate, challenge, and mitigate gender inequities in football refereeing. In other words, how might VAR (and other technological innovations in sport) shape justice and fairness in leadership roles—both on and off the field—by offering opportunities for improvement while also introducing potential obstacles? The research question guiding our analysis is: In what ways are gendered practices of football refereeing challenged, redefined, and reproduced through the integration of VAR technology? To examine this research question, we employ theoretical concepts from Goffman and Connell to analyze gendered practices. In our analysis we term these gendered practices “masculine performance.” In the following, we outline key findings from research on the football refereeing role and gender, as well as VAR and football refereeing. The article continues with our theoretical framework where we combine Goffman's dramaturgical approach with Connell's concept of hegemonic masculinity. Next, our methodological approach and sample are outlined before the findings and discussion are presented. The article ends with a conclusion summarizing key findings and avenues for further research.

Literature Review

There are two international fields that inform our research: (1) football refereeing and gender and (2) VAR in football.

Football Refereeing and Gender

Football referees have received increased attention from sport scholars for instance related to performance and development (Webb et al., 2021a), physical and psychological demands of the refereeing role (Pizzera et al., 2022), recruitment and retention of referees (Livingston et al., 2020), and abuse (Webb et al., 2021b), as well as the increasing use of technologies in refereeing (Armenteros et al., 2019). Further, some studies have argued that several of the abovementioned aspects are gendered. Abuse is for instance experienced by both men and women referees (Webb et al., 2021b) but women often experience gendered abuse where they are targeted because they are women referees, something that men referees do not experience (Grubb et al., 2023). Drury et al. (2022) illustrate how women referees develop strategies for coping with sexist abuse from players and fans. Often these coping strategies imply downplaying the abuse or ignoring the sexist aspects of it (Forbes et al., 2015). Research indicates that due to gendered abuse women referees often feel compelled to prove their skills and justify their decisions to players, coaches, and supporters, particularly when officiating in men's football (Gubby & Martin, 2024). In part this is due to women being underrepresented as football referees, especially in men's football (Reid & Dallaire, 2020). The underrepresentation of women in men's football refereeing places additional pressure on the few women who do officiate, as they often feel a responsibility to represent all women referees through their performance (Gubby & Martin, 2024).

Drawing on Bryan et al. (2021), women in football often face challenges stemming from being perceived as “not fitting in” within a sport traditionally defined by masculine norms. This perception extends to refereeing, where women are often viewed as not conforming to traditional expectations of the role which is shaped by masculine standards, ideals, and norms. These standards frequently emphasize physical characteristics such as strength, speed, and size (Kim & Hong, 2016). Jones and Edwards (2013) argue that organizational policies reinforce these masculine perceptions, perpetuating the belief that women referees differ from men in terms of skills and performance. Such dominant views influence recruitment practices often privileging men while creating barriers for women who must navigate entrenched notions of who and what a referee “should” be (Reid & Dallaire, 2019).

Women referees face ongoing challenges in navigating a role where men and masculine ideals are perceived as the norm (Drury et al., 2022; Grubb et al., 2023; Reid & Dallaire, 2019). This dynamic often leads to the marginalization of women in refereeing, and particularly LGBTQ+ women (Baeth et al., 2023). Grubb et al. (2023) highlight the need for greater institutional support, advocating for the expansion of women's development networks and creating opportunities for women referees to connect regularly. The significance of peer and organizational support is also emphasized by Kim and Hong (2016), especially in work-family conflicts related to childcare and pregnancy (Wicker et al., 2024).

Recognizing how gendered barriers and stereotypes shape the refereeing role is essential for understanding how novel technologies like VAR will transform it. Presently, men appear closer to the notion of a good football referee and as a result men are often recruited and promoted to referee (especially) men's elite football. This is crucial regarding VAR, as men's club football is usually where VAR is implemented. Cardinale and Varley (2017) argue that novel technologies are most often implemented in men's (elite) sports due to being costly and requiring expertise, which in this case is a problem since men's sports is a domain where women rarely act as referees (Reid & Dallaire, 2019). This also impacts research regarding VAR in football.

VAR in Football

Research examining VAR in elite refereeing from a gender perspective remains scarce (Skirbekk, 2023). This gap may partly be attributed to the fact that VAR is predominantly implemented in men's elite club football, potentially leading to the neglect of gendered dimensions related to its use. The concentration of VAR in men's club football is concerning given its promotion as an essential tool for enhancing professionalism, improving public perception, and upholding moral standards in the sport (Tamir & Bar-Eli, 2021). However, rather than focusing on the gendered implications of VAR many studies emphasize its impact on “the game of football” through variables such as the number of penalties, yellow and red cards, and total playing time (Errekagorri et al., 2020; Han et al., 2020; Lago-Peñas et al., 2019; Lago-Peñas et al., 2021). These quantitative studies rely on extensive statistical data predominantly drawn from men's elite football leagues in countries like Germany, Spain, and China. Building upon this focus on VARs impact on "the game of football", the limited studies incorporating data from women's football (e.g., Zhang et al., 2022) refrain from critically addressing gendered aspects of VAR. Instead, these studies compare changes in specific variables before and after VAR implementation to assess its influence on decision-making processes. While certain changes are identified they are often minor; and Lago-Peñas et al. (2019) as a result argue that the overall impact of VAR remains statistically insignificant.

Holder et al. (2021) argue that while VAR does not significantly alter the outcome of decisions, it still has a notable impact on refereeing practices. Specifically, their findings suggest that VAR helps to reduce home team bias in officiating. This perceived ability of VAR to minimize (human) errors and mitigate bias is rooted in narratives of sports technologies as “objective” tools (Zglinski, 2020; Skirbekk, 2023). However, Zglinski (2020) emphasizes that VAR is more effective at enforcing rules with binary outcomes (e.g., whether the ball crossed the line or not) than at addressing broader standards and expectations of judgment, which often lack definitive answers. This distinction echoes earlier discussions (Colwell, 2000) about the tension between the intentions behind and practice of football rules.

Such tensions and fairness-related expectations surrounding VAR are illustrated by research on football fans’ perception of VARs implementation and impact. This research is often conducted through surveys in men's league football. For instance, fans in the British Premier League express that VAR impacts the games to the extent that “it's not even football anymore” (Scanlon et al., 2022, p. 1084). However, Winand et al. (2021) found that most football fans appreciate VARs efforts to improve accuracy and fairness, but that the more engaged supporters are the more critical they are of VAR. Thus, VAR is experienced in varied ways. Utilizing a qualitative semi-structured interview approach, Van den Berg and Surujlal (2020) argue fans have ambivalent experiences with VAR, and they suggest improving these experiences by increasing the transparency of VAR. One suggestion is to include stadium announcements from the VAR-room (Van den Berg & Surujlal, 2020). With a different approach, Peterson-Wagner and Ludvigsen (2023) analyze fan commentaries regarding VAR on YouTube to show that fairness is perceived as something benefitting clubs and players from the “global north.” Although fan discourses mostly consist of dissatisfaction and skepticism toward both the implementation and use of VAR this study also finds that fan experiences of VAR are ambivalent (Peterson-Wagner & Ludvigsen, 2023).

Current research fails to provide insights into how referees learn, utilize, and experience VAR. This is an important knowledge gap to address, given the arguments that VAR fundamentally alters the nature of football and challenges referees’ authority (Collins, 2010, 2019). Such issues are also tied to the increased complexity of decision-making with multiple angles and additional personnel (referees acting as VAR) being involved in determining outcomes in football matches. Adding to this complexity, Mather (2020) highlights how the use of specific frames and slow-motion footage can complicate certain decisions, ultimately contesting the notion of accuracy (Collins, 2019). These challenges have significant implications for the authority of referees (Skirbekk, 2025). As technology is perceived as “objective” (Zglinski, 2020; Skirbekk, 2023) VAR's authority is elevated, potentially undermining the perceived authority of on-field referees (Royce, 2012). This dynamic positions referees as passive actors reliant on VAR for assistance and subject to its corrections, further diminishing their autonomy and professional standing.

Analytical Framework

To examine how the (gendered) practices of football refereeing are challenged, redefined, or reproduced through the integration of VAR technology, we combine Goffman's dramaturgical approach (1959, 1967) with Connell's (1987, 1995) concept of hegemonic masculinity.

Social Interaction as Performance

To explore refereeing and refereeing practices this study draws on Goffman's symbolic interactionist and dramaturgical approach (1959), as well as his concepts of interaction rituals and face-work (1967). A few studies on the social interactions of referees have applied the framework of dramaturgical sociology. These studies highlight various strategic behaviors, such as players’ attempts to influence referees (Cunningham et al., 2015), the front-stage face-work employed by sports officials to manage interactions with players (Cunningham et al., 2018) and the techniques coaches use to sway referees’ decision-making in handball (Debanne, 2014).

According to Goffman (1959), the individual's expressiveness, and thus the capacity to give impressions, involves two different kinds of sign activity: “the expression that he gives, and the expression that he gives off” (Goffman, 1959, p. 2, italics in original). The first represents giving information and thus communication in the traditional and narrow sense. The second involves the more theatrical, contextual, non-verbal, and presumably unintentional expressions given, on purpose or not, that others can treat as symptomatic of the actor. The expectation being that the action is performed for reasons other than the information conveyed in this way. According to Goffman, the individual presenting himself before others will want to control the conduct of the others and not least their responsive treatment of him:

This control is achieved largely by influencing the definition of the situation which the others come to formulate, and he can influence this definition by expressing himself in such a way as to give them the kind of impression that will lead them to act voluntarily in accordance with his own plan. (Goffman, 1959, pp. 3–4)

Hence, the individual gives an impression to others that is in the person's interest to give. Crucial to Goffman is that any projected definition of the situation has a distinctive moral character; the individual's moral right to expect to be treated in accordance with one's social characteristics, and that the individual who has these characteristics should be what he claims to be.

Ordinarily, the definition of the situation projected by the different participants in an interaction is sufficiently attuned to one another so that open contradiction will be avoided. However, events will occur within the interaction that will contradict, discredit, or cast doubt on the individual's assessment of the definition of the situation. To avoid such “definitional disruptions” preventive and defensive practices may be employed to secure the impression given by the individual (Goffman, 1959, p. 13) during their performance.

A “performance” represents “all the activity of a given participant on a given occasion which serves to influence in any way, any of the other participants” (Goffman, 1959, p. 15). Others who participate in the performance are co-participants, audience members, or observers. Performers have “a personal front,” that is, the parts that we most intimately identify with the performer and that we expect will appear in encounters or interactions, such as symbols of rank or class, clothing, sex, age, ethnic characteristics, size and looks, posture, speech patterns, facial expressions, bodily gestures, and the like (Goffman, 1959, p. 24).

Goffman notes that one could easily see the function of the performance as personal, but that this view is limited since performances could express the characteristics of the task performed. More important, the definition of the situation projected by the performer may well be “an integral part of a projection that is fostered and sustained by the intimate cooperation of more than one participant” (1976, p. 78). The joint performance of the referee and assistant referees could exemplify such teamwork (Goffman shortens it to “team”) and implementing VAR increases the size of the “performance team.”

There are two basic components in the relationship between members of a team. First, there is a bond of “reciprocal dependence” between the teammates as any member of the team “has the power to give the show away” (Goffman, 1959, p. 82). Second, there is a bond of “reciprocal familiarity” since cooperation in maintaining a given definition of the situation to the audience means that the team will not be able to maintain that impression toward one another. Thus, the team could cause damage to the performer or the other members of the team's “face” (Goffman, 1967). Since “performance disruptions” or “unmeant gestures” may occur the performers “face” is jeopardized, that is, the internally consistent line the performer takes. Acting out a line relates to “a pattern of verbal and nonverbal acts by which he expresses his view of the situation and through this his evaluation of participants, especially himself” (Goffman, 1967, p. 5). This line is “supported by judgements and evidence conveyed by other participants, and that is confirmed by evidence conveyed through impersonal agencies in the situation” (Goffman, 1967, pp. 6–7). It is the minor, unintended disruptions, or incidents that “impression management” functions to avoid (Goffman, 1959, p. 212), by defensive or protective strategies.

Regarding the significance of gender Goffman is most explicit in Gender Advertisements (1976), where he demonstrates that representations of gender in media reflect and reinforce cultural expectations of gender roles. He establishes that the performance of gender constitutes rituals, gestures, and behavior that signal masculinity or femininity, shaped by these cultural norms. Gender and gendered “face-work” is thus performed in social interactions. However, feminist critics point to a continuity of patriarchal views and language underlying Goffman's work (Deegan, 2014), and that his rather descriptive analyses lack a critical stance. To incorporate a critical feminist perspective to our analysis, we combine Goffman's work with Connell's (1987, 1995) concept of hegemonic masculinity.

Hegemonic Masculinity

Originally adopted from Gramsci (see Bates, 1975) and implemented by Carrigan et al. (1985), hegemonic masculinity refers to the social power undermining the ideology and beliefs of society, operating mainly at a symbolic level. According to Connell (1987, 1995), “hegemonic masculinity” represents the masculinity that at a given time is considered the most idealized and is typically represented by a minority of men, usually a white, western, heterosexual man, displaying attributes of aggressiveness and capacity to violent behavior.

In a rethinking of the concept, Connell and Messerschmidt (2005) underline that hegemonic masculinity is to be understood as “the pattern of practice (i.e. things done, not just a set of role expectations or an identity) that allowed men's dominance over women to continue” (2005, p. 832). Hegemonic masculinity is distinguished from other masculinities normatively, requiring all men to position themselves in relation to it. Ideologically, hegemonic masculinity serves to legitimize a global subordination of women to men. Men who receive the benefits of this patriarchal system without enacting masculine dominance are regarded as showing a “complicit masculinity” (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). It is in relation to this group (and to the compliance among heterosexual women) that the concept of hegemony is most powerful, as it means dominance “achieved through culture, institutions, and persuasion” (p. 832).

Masculinities are shaped through individual experiences, relational dynamics, situational contexts, and broader structural (including national) frameworks (Connell, 2005). This means that in each situation men and masculinities can be analytically placed in a social hierarchy (Tjønndal et al., 2022). Connell and Messerschmidt (2005, p. 54) interprets this as an institutionalization of social relations and gender inequality highlighting how “men's greater sporting prowess has become a theme of backlash against feminism. It serves as symbolic proof of men's superiority and right to rule.” In many situational contexts leadership roles in sport exemplify this dynamic by reinforcing the hegemonic masculinities Connell describes.

Methods

Our methodological approach is an integrative methodology based on the contributions of ethnomethodology (Garfinkel, 1967; Heritage, 1984) and interactional constructivism (Miller & Glassner, 2004). This methodology reflects the emphasis on both the process-oriented and meaning-centered aspects and the methods and practices in the participants’ construction of meaning and social reality through interaction. The empirical material consists of semi-structured interviews with elite football referees and referee instructors in Norway. We consider interviews to be a fruitful method for generating knowledge about the meanings that individuals attribute to their experiences and social worlds (Miller & Glassner, 2004).

Participants

All interviewed participants are either elite football referees or referee instructors affiliated with the Norwegian Football Federation (NFF). In total the number of interviewees is 23, of whom 16 are elite referees and seven are instructors, eight women and 15 men. All participating referees act as referees in either the men's first and second division or the women's first division. The instructors are all previous elite referees tasked with being both advisors to referees and ranking their performances. The strategic sampling criteria for including these participants were: (1) they are elite referees or referee instructors in Norway and (2) they took part in NFFs VAR-training during the 2022/2023 season. All the interviewed referees have other jobs within a range of private and public sector as their main source of income. Flexibility from their employer was a necessity to facilitate elite football refereeing for everyone.

Procedure

Prior to any contact with potential participants the study was granted ethical approval by the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research (SIKT). Following this, the first author e-mailed the NFF in the spring of 2022 to introduce the project and request contact information of potential participants. In total 35 interview requests were sent to individuals fitting the inclusion criteria, resulting in 23 interviews. All interviews were carried out during the first VAR training program in Norway in the fall of 2022. Thirteen interviews were conducted digitally via Teams or Zoom while 10 were conducted physically, most often at the participants’ respective workplace. All interviews were recorded and transcribed continuously. The recordings were deleted after the completion of transcriptions. To ensure the participants’ anonymity only the gender and title (referee or instructor) of the participants is present in the analysis.

Analytical Approach

We analyzed the data by employing Eggebø's (2020) collective qualitative analysis. This approach is a methodological tool to enhance the rigor of the analytical process and to foster creativity in the development of thematic codes and categories. Specifically, the approach consists of four steps, which are all done collectively (Eggebø, 2020). The first step is for all authors to read through transcriptions of interview data and write abstracts from each interview. Step two consists of mapping data through joint discussions and construction of themes and topics, based on the abstracts. This allowed for step three which is sorting the data in thematic and analytic groups (Eggebø, 2020). Following this, we made a disposition and outlined a workplan for the writing process, which is step four (Eggebø, 2020). The collective approach led to the development of 10 analytical categories of whom four are included in this article: (1) the refereeing role, (2) the refereeing body, (3) gender and the VAR role, and (4) the nature and function of VAR—what it is and what it “does.” Following the collective analysis the first author read through the transcriptions of the interview material again, in order to extract quotes and descriptions fitting the four analytical categories chosen to be part of this article.

Findings and Discussion

The findings begin with a presentation of how the referees ascribe meaning to the social world of elite football refereeing through their constructions of what a good football referee is. The second part of the analysis focuses on the changing practices of the football refereeing role following the implementation of VAR. The third part brings attention to VAR and the reproduction of masculine standards in football refereeing.

What Makes a Good Football Referee?

In this section we analyze data from the first two analytical categories: (1) the refereeing role and (2) the refereeing body. Although there is no absolute formalized list of requirements or characteristics for elite refereeing the need to pass running tests, such as sprints, to qualify for specific divisions places significant emphasis on a particular type of physical fitness and physique. In the interviews fitness is given overall significant importance, as one instructor notes:

You must be in good physical shape. That is very important (..) Strength. Stamina. And of course, you need knowledge and understanding of football. That is extremely important. And you need to be tough enough as well. Dare to blow the whistle and have the courage to stand by your decisions in heated situations. Be mentally strong. Possess leadership qualities. Have the ability to include the rest of the team and earn acceptance from players. If you feel insecure, you need to appear confident. (Interviewee 23, man, VAR-instructor)

Following Goffman (1959) the underlined importance of fitness is due to the requirement of referees to control the definition of situations, as the referee is (supposed to be) the one deciding the outcome of disputed events. Such physical presence has traditionally been perceived as possessed by men refereeing, and as needed to perform the refereeing role adequately (Drury et al., 2022; Reid & Dallaire, 2019). This becomes problematic when the role is understood by many to be gender-neutral, exemplified by an instructor stating: “if you’re good enough, you’re good enough. It doesn’t matter whether you’re man or woman.” Therefore, the notion of masculine characteristics fitting men implies gendering of the refereeing role which works to undermine women acting as referees (Jones & Edwards, 2013; Kim & Hong, 2016).

That Interviewee 23 also mentions communicative skills to manage the players and “sensing” the game as pivotal in the refereeing role is significant, as these characteristics appear (even more) “gender-neutral” compared to fitness and the result of running-tests. However, as women referees are not seen to “fit” the role in the first place, they must often communicate differently, and with other purposes than men refereeing. Such staging of character by enhanced “dramaturgical discipline” (Goffman, 1959, p. 216), and management of one's face and voice, are performed to prove that they can be trusted. As Forbes et al. (2015) and Gubby and Martin (2024) have shown, this performance materializes in coping strategies where women referees “downplay” the significance of their gender to justify themselves toward players, coaches, and spectators.

As noted by Interviewee 23 this is due to the importance of appearance. In line with Goffman (1959) this is an example of the refereeing role being a social role where the performance is attached to a given status. One purpose of the refereeing performance is to maintain the status through acceptance, which occurs through the performers (referees) taking a consistent line to maintain “face” (Goffman, 1967). This is highlighted by Interviewee 23 when pointing out that “if you feel insecure, you need to appear confident.” Following Goffman (1959) this is a way of managing expressions “given off” to others and ultimately avoiding “definitional disruptions” (i.e., losing control of the game due to players not respecting the referee). The interviewees express nuanced opinions on which expressions “given off” makes a good football referee. However, the tendency is that the ideal of what makes a good referee is narrowing:

There's a broad span between the very jovial referee and the strict, rigid one (…) So, what makes a good referee? That is subjective. It's a matter of personality – some are well-liked, while others are less popular (…) There's less room for the jovial, chatty type in today's football. It used to be more variations and distinctive personalities (…) What does a FIFA-referee² look like today? They’re serious, fit, professional athletes with game management skills. There's a tendency towards uniformity. Consensus of a certain standard. For example, in terms of fitness. We no longer want the former stereotypical semi-fit referee. That is a no-go in elite football today. There are variations, but what's acceptable narrows. So, there's an ideal that I can’t quite explain, but that everyone agrees on. (Interviewee 8, woman, referee)

Although these (masculine) characteristics and practices are not formalized they combine to make up what Goffman (1959) calls the personal front, in this case of an elite football referee. This personal front relates to what is “expected to appear in encounters, such as symbols, class, clothing, sex, age, size and looks, speech patterns” (p. 24). Although it is often difficult to pinpoint exactly what the ideal referee is it implies traditional masculine skills and characteristics often attributed to men in refereeing (Kim & Hong, 2016).

Following this, an understanding of the refereeing role as gender-neutral contributes to upholding a hegemony through “complicit masculinity” (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). This creates a refereeing context where men are benefitted without needing to enact masculine dominance, and women comply, due to a culture ideologically legitimating masculine characteristics as dominant gendered practices in elite refereeing (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). Further, the hegemony of men in elite refereeing is asserted when the ideal referee is increasingly standardized. However, the implementation of VAR represents a disruption of the refereeing role allowing performance of new dynamics and possibly dismantling of the hegemony.

VAR and the Changing Dynamics of Football Refereeing

In this section we analyze data from the fourth analytic category, (4) the nature and function of VAR—what it is and what it “does.” Perceived as a tool for increased professionalism (Tamir & Bar-Eli, 2021) several practices of the refereeing role are altered due to the introduction of VAR. Following Goffman (1959), expectations related to the performers’ (referees) “personal front” in terms of speech patterns, bodily gestures, and symbols of rank might be altered. These expectations influence the acting of the performers’ (referees) “line”, possibly altering the patterns of verbal and nonverbal acts (Goffman, 1967). When emphasizing the most influential changes or requirements needed as elite referees due to the implementation of VAR, Interviewee 21 responds:

You must collaborate with more people, which means more communication. The line of communication and choice of words must be clear not to be misunderstood or lead to mistakes. You need to give some information yourself, and you need to receive information from even more people. Multiple people may be communicating at the same time. If something happens and several people start shouting at the same time, it is hard to follow. Clear guidelines on who speaks, when and how, are needed. (Interviewee 21, man, VAR-instructor)

More people communicating complicates interaction. The implementation of VAR means that an additional three people are included in the decision-making and made part of the “team” (Goffman, 1959). Thus, the main referee must interact continuously with six people during the performance (i.e., the game). Consequently, clear communication is presented as crucial. Insufficient communication caused by different definitions of the situation among team-members further complicated by slow-motion and multiple camera-angles (Mather, 2020) could disrupt the performance. Careful collusive communication “conveyed in such a way as to cause no threat to the illusion that is being fostered for the audience” (Goffman, 1959, p. 177) are therefore vital. However, the formal purpose of VAR “correcting” decisions, while appearing to complicate existing decision-making processes might contribute to what Royce (2012) argues is a strengthening of VARs authority, while weakening the authority of referees.

Thus, the VAR-role contributes to the enactment of power relations within the elite refereeing “team” (Goffman, 1959). Crucially, as Interviewee 9 notes, it is not given how this enactment between the VAR and on-field referee play out:

On-field, I don’t think that VAR is the most complex, but in the VAR-room, however, to be true to the protocol and standardize the understanding across the group of referees…So, I believe that on-field there will be minimal changes. But in the VAR-room, it goes without saying, it is something entirely new. The commands, the protocol, the communication. It is a very interesting aspect when the most experienced referee in the league is acting as VAR-referee and the least experienced referee is officiating on-field. And vice versa, right? I noticed that those on-field blindly accepted what I said as VAR without applying their own judgement to the situations, as they were standing in front of the screen³, for example. (Interviewee 9, man, referee)

Interviewee 9 does not expect VAR to change referees’ performance on the field. However, he considers the implications of VAR to alter interaction in the case where the VAR-performer is of a higher rank than the on-field referee. Interviewee 9 fears for (some of the) on-field referees’ authority, but not due to VAR being perceived as objective, in line with Zglinski (2020). The quote by Interviewee 9 is instead an example of referees’ authority being challenged due to what Goffman calls a “dilemma of status.” This occurs when “a service specialist”—a person (VAR-referee) who has the role of attending to the needs of the performer (on-field referee)—has a higher rank (Goffman, 1959, p. 154). Due to masculine performances being ascribed authority and benefitting men as the ideal referee women referees might struggle to enact the same authority as a “service specialist.” The dilemma is caused by “high status and low information control on one side, and low status and high information control on the other” and is a vital part for controlling the performance by influencing the definition of the situation (Goffman, 1959). Thus, when women referees are perceived to have lower “rank” than men in refereeing in the first place, both acting as a “service specialist” and being an on-field referee “serviced” by VAR have gendered implications due to women referees largely being “ranked” lower than men. For instance, whose judgement decides the outcome “in front of the screen,” as Interviewee 9 puts it.

The occurring dilemma of “rank” is perceived as potentially disrupting for the on-field referee. However, as the refereeing role is mostly performed by men and the notion of a good referee is based on masculine characteristics (Drury et al., 2022; Reid & Dallaire, 2019), this makes for a power struggle between the VAR and on-field referee, not only based on rank but also gender. Interviewee 5 describes: Interviewee:

It changes you as a person. We’re a team and VAR is supposed to be someone you trust. That's a psychological effect you need to be prepared for and able to handle. It's stressful. It's a different way of refereeing. You must adapt to technology in order to use it efficiently, (and) then it also becomes difficult to referee without it.

Researcher:

Do you think this could affect your authority as on-field referee?

Interviewee:

Yes, I guess there's a barrier for VAR to intervene. It [a VAR-situation] means they think you’ve made a clear and obvious mistake…(…) when you run to watch the clip it's in the back of your head (“they think I made a mistake”). You need to be tough to stand your ground and say, “I don’t agree” (oppose the VAR-decision) (interviewee 5, woman, referee).

A consequence of having limited engagement with VAR is that women referees are often less experienced with the technology than their men refereeing colleagues (Skirbekk, 2025). Implicitly women referees can feel challenged by VAR to a larger extent than men, exemplified by Interviewee 5 stating the “need to be tough to stand your ground” whereas Interviewee 9 finds a VAR-intervention “interesting.” These power relations may disturb interaction, for instance if a woman acts as VAR in a team (Goffman, 1959) where a man is on-field referee. Due to such practices of hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 1987, 1995), and the fact that VAR is implemented in men's elite football where men act as on-field referees only, women might need to justify their abilities to perform as VARs, like Gubby and Martin (2024) demonstrate is the case of on-field referees. And as Interviewee 5 illustrates this is done by performing and accepting masculine characteristics (being tough) as necessary and in turn contributing to (re)producing hegemony through “complicit masculinity”-practices (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005).

VAR and the Reproduction of Masculine Performance

This section presents data from the third analytic category: (3) gender and the VAR role. As shown, the relationship between VAR and the on-field referee is a continuous negotiation of power relations and authority. Given that the refereeing role is based on a personal front and performance of “a line” (Goffman, 1959, 1967) based on masculine ideals the VAR-role is embedded in a similar hegemony (Connell, 1987, 1995; Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). In other words, the masculine standardization of the refereeing role contributes to VAR increasing gender differences in elite refereeing. In turn the construction of the VAR-role, though different in many ways from the on-field role, makes it something women are less suited to perform. As Interviewee 11 states: Interviewee:

You’ll learn to spot who fits the VAR-role and not. I think a lot of referees will struggle to become a good VAR-referee because it is so unnatural compared to their personality on-field(…) I guess my impression is that women referees…they are a bit more hesitant and cautious. As a VAR, they might need more encouragement and training, compared to many men referees.

Researcher:

In the VAR-role?

Interviewee:

Yes. I don’t want to talk too much about it, but I think several of the women were not really fitting the VAR-role. But that's just how it is, it's like that for some of the men as well. It's not for everyone. (Interviewee 11, man, referee)

Here, the VAR-role is constructed similarly to the refereeing role, and the exclusion of women is legitimized through masculine standards mostly derived from a physical face-work portrayed as gender-neutral (Reid & Dallaire, 2019). Through the enactment of “complicit masculinity” (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005) men are assumed to fit the role better, whether it relates to on-field refereeing or VAR-refereeing. The “personal front” (Goffman, 1959) of a good VAR-referee subtly implies an internally consistent line (Goffman, 1967) of the (masculine) characteristics of the on-field refereeing role but expressing them differently. The contradictory effort of constructing the VAR-role as a prolonged version of the on-field refereeing role while simultaneously claiming it to be different is pointed out by Interviewee 8:

How do you train to become a good VAR-referee? By watching video clips. Why is it enough for men refereeing in the men's elite division to watch clips, but for me it's not enough? As a VAR-referee you evaluate clips, we do not act as on-field referees. Therefore, it should be your ability to analyze clips that counts (…) I think there are some disagreements [regarding VAR-training and requirements]. (Interviewee 8, woman, referee)

The frustration latent in this quote is tied to fitness and physical requirements being valued also when the task is to (stationary) evaluate clips (the VAR-role). Thus, this is an example of a pattern of practice (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005) where not only expectations to the role but what is actually done contributes to maintaining hegemonic masculinity. The VAR-role, however, is part of a new development in elite refereeing and the standardizations of what constitutes this role might not yet be as cemented as the on-field refereeing role. Therefore, the VAR-role might be a novel opportunity to include women in the elite refereeing “team” (Goffman, 1959), as Interviewee 12 notes:

It's interesting, because the VAR-role is about precision. You need to have a high level of accuracy. From my experience, women are, generally (…) more thorough and accurate than men. They like to be exact and accurate. So, I’d like to think that we’ll see more women referees in the coming years…As VAR that is. Because being a VAR and on-field referee are two different things. (Interviewee 12, man, referee)

In this statement thoroughness makes women suited for the VAR-role as opposed to the thinking of Interviewee 11 above who perceives the “hesitant and cautious” women as problematic when acting as VAR-referee. Although seemingly positive of women as VAR-referees, Interviewee 12 simultaneously contributes to cementing the on-field refereeing role as inherently masculine by underlining that we might “see more women referees…as a VAR that is.” Despite the roles being “two different things” the VAR-role is ironically also preserved for individuals fitting the notion of the ideal (on-field) referee (Drury et al., 2022; Reid & Dallaire, 2019), through for instance the need to pass required fitness tests or having on-field experience. This contradicting situation is acknowledged by Interviewee 1, who explains:

It comes down to strength and stamina (..) You’re allowed to act as VAR in the same division as you referee on-field (..) Maybe there should be a VAR-test, and the fitness test could be preserved for on-field referees. That way, the best VAR-referees could act as VAR regardless of gender and league level. As opposed to now, where you’re allowed to act as VAR-referee if you pass physical requirements to be on-field referee in that league. (Interviewee 1, woman, referee)

Even if, as Interviewee 12 argues, women might be more suited to be VAR-referees than men they are hindered by the existing process of selection, recruitment, and promotion that favors (certain) men fitting the elite referee ideal. Utilizing the same physical test and not for instance a VAR-test as suggested by Interviewee 1, legitimizes the preservation of hegemonic masculinity in elite refereeing as it allows “men's dominance over women to continue” (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 832). The result is that perceived importance of fitness tests appears to make women less suited for VAR-roles. Consequently, VARs potential to improve gender equity in elite refereeing do not appear plausible for the interviewees:

I don’t think it [implementing VAR] will have a decisive impact on the gender diversity in football refereeing. The most important for women to be promoted is their skills as on-field referees. Being a VAR-referee requires an understanding of the game, and experience as a referee. I’m not saying that one needs experience on-field from the men's league to be a VAR-referee. It's not an absolute requirement…but it's an advantage if the VAR-referee has…qualified professional experience. (Interviewee 20, man, VAR-instructor)

The on-field refereeing role is key to being promoted for the VAR-role. Implicitly, Interviewee 20 argues that VAR-referees should have on-field experience in the division using VAR (men's elite). Following Jones and Edwards (2013) and Kim and Hong (2016) however, this role is entrenched in masculine ideals contributing to men (“automatically”) refereeing men's elite leagues (with VAR), which makes them eligible for the VAR-role as well. In terms of Goffman (1959) this appears as a contradicting “personal front” within the performance team. This contradiction relates to the VAR-role being represented as an intimate part of the refereeing role causing similar expectations regarding the performers’ line (Goffman, 1967), despite the roles being understood to have different requirements.

Conclusion

This article examine the ways in which gendered practices of football refereeing are challenged, redefined, and reproduced through the integration of VAR-technology. Throughout our analysis we demonstrate how the implementation of VAR both challenges and reproduces gendered expectations and practices in elite football refereeing through three main arguments.

First, our material illustrates how VAR is implemented in a context where the “line” (Goffman, 1967) of a good referee, and notions of what the “personal front” (Goffman, 1959) of elite referees entails, is embedded with masculine characteristics. This line then is the script or strategy a referee adopts during their performance, guiding how they interact with others and work to enhance their “dramaturgical discipline” to justify themselves toward players, coaches, and supporters. Thus, these practices of football referees are effectively gendered practices as men are closer to the perceived ideal referee than women referees and women must work harder to adhere to the “line” (Goffman, 1967) of the refereeing role.

Second, the construction of the refereeing role as inherently masculine is disrupted by VAR but not necessarily in ways that include individuals who do not benefit from the dominating performances of masculinity. On the contrary, new requirements of the on-field refereeing role following the implementation of VAR seem to emphasize the need for the gendered practices which favor men and hegemonic masculinity. For instance, the need to “be tough” is underlined by the interviewees, as VAR may challenge the authority of on-field referees. In this context being “tough” is related to certain traditional masculine practices of sports leadership. Thus, the focus on being tough exemplies how VAR technology redefines (gendered) practices in ways that reproduce the significance of gender in elite football refereeing. Therefore, the reproduction of hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 1987, 1995) reinforced by VAR appears to contribute to increased gender differences in elite refereeing in terms of who “fits” the role.

Third, the masculine notion of the on-field refereeing role is prolonged and made part of the “face work” of the VAR-role as well. The hegemonic masculinity related to the on-field refereeing role is transferred from the pitch to the VAR-facilities. Through practices of “complicit masculinity” (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005) elite referees and instructors contribute to the upholding of elite refereeing as something men are more suited for regardless of which role (on-field or VAR) one performs. Therefore, despite being a different way of performing in elite refereeing the VAR-role is entrenched in the same masculine characteristics as the on-field refereeing role traditionally have been ascribed (Forbes et al., 2015). Consequently, women referees are caught in a situation where they are ranked lower than men in terms of enactment with technology along with the dominant gendering that a good referee equals a man (Grubb et al., 2023; Jones & Edwards, 2013). This dynamic works to reinforce the notion of men and technology as intertwined in elite refereeing with the consequence of legitimizing the subordination of women to men. If technological innovations like VAR help construct a masculine hegemony by reproducing gendered practices, the increasingly technology-driven refereeing role is upheld as one that favors men and reinforces performances of masculine characteristics. Ultimately the VAR-role seems to uphold the notion of men and masculinity in relation to technology, through gendered practices of masculinity in refereeing.

The analytical framework utilized in this article contributes by illustrating how technology and gender intertwine in elite football refereeing. The combination of dramaturgical approach and the concept of hegemonic masculinity show how acting out a “line” when performing the refereeing role is expected to be based on masculine characteristics, and that VAR-technology provides to reinforce this masculine performance. As shown, this happens in various ways and adds to the existing gender inequity in elite refereeing. The hegemony of men's elite football being more prestigious to referee than women's elite football is cemented by VAR being implemented in men's elite football exclusively. Through the construction of an integrated gendered technological practice men are interacting with VAR-technology to a larger extent than women referees. This is problematic as refereeing with and without VAR can be classified as two distinct ventures (Skirbekk, 2025) and demonstrates the need for greater awareness of novel technologies’ implications for gender equality in sport, particularly among key stakeholders such as governing bodies and team managers.

As the landscape of sports refereeing evolves, technological innovations and advancements are presumably poised to continue expanding. It is therefore crucial that further research examines the potential consequences that the implementation of such technologies may have for women in sports, including any unforeseen gendered practices.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Sigbjørn Skirbekk

Hilde Berit Moen

Anne Tjønndal

Notes

Author Biographies

Sigbjørn Skirbekk is a Doctoral Student in sociology. His area of research is sports technology focusing on digital inequalities.

Hilde Berit Moen is an Associate Professor in social work. Her area of research is within the field of sociology of health and illness, in particular the connection between society and culture, and health and body.

Anne Tjønndal is Professor of Sociology of Sport. Her area of research is sports technology and innovation focusing on digital inequalities, integrity issues and governance.

References

Armenteros

Benitez

A. J.

Betancor

(2019). The use of video technologies in refereeing football and other sports. Routledge.

Baeth

A. C.

Tingle

J. K.

Jacobs

B. L.

Zvosec

C. C.

(2023). “It was my story to tell and I wasn’t ready to tell it”: Stigma management amongst LGBTQ+ sport officials. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 47(3), 228–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/01937235231171368

Bates

T. R.

(1975). Gramsci and the theory of hegemony. Journal of the History of Ideas, 36(2), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.2307/2708933

Bryan

Pope

Rankin-Wright

A. J.

(2021). On the periphery: Examining women’s exclusion from core leadership roles in the “extremely gendered” organization of men’s club football in England. Gender & Society, 35(6), 940–970. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912432211046318

Cardinale

Varley

M. C.

(2017). Wearable training-monitoring technology: Applications, challenges, and opportunities. International Journal of Sports Psychology and Performance, 12(s2), s2–s55. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2016-0423

Carrigan

Connell

R. W.

Lee

(1985). Toward a new sociology of masculinity. Theory and Society, 14(5), 551–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00160017

Collins

(2010). The philosophy of umpiring and the introduction of decision-aid technology. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 37(2), 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2010.9714772

Collins

(2019). Applying philosophy to refereeing and umpiring technology. Philosophies, 4(21), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies4020021

Colwell

(2000). The “letter” and the “spirit”: Football laws and refereeing in the twenty-first century. Soccer & Society, 1(1), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660970008721259

10.

Connell

R. W.

(1987). Gender and power: Society, the person and sexual politics. Polity.

11.

Connell

R. W.

(1995). Masculinities. Polity.

12.

Connell

R. W.

Messerschmidt

J. W.

(2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender and Society, 19(6), 829–859. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243205278639

13.

Cunningham

Simmons

Mascarenhas

(2018). Sport officials’ strategies for managing interactions with players: Face-work on the front-stage. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 39, 154–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.08.009

14.

Cunningham

Simmons

Mascarenhas

Redhead

(2015). Exploring player communication in interactions with sport officials. Movement & Sport Sciences, 87(1), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1051/sm/2014021

15.

Cunningham

G. B.

Webb

Wicker

(2024). Female officials in Europe and their sport’s diversity climate. European Sport Management Quarterly, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2024.2391843

16.

Debanne

(2014). Techniques used by coaches to influence referees in professional team handball. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 9(3), 433–446. https://doi.org/10.1260/1747-9541.9.3.433

17.

Deegan

M. J.

(2014). Goffman on gender, sexism, and feminism: A summary of notes on a conversation with Erving Goffman and my reflections then and now. Symbolic Interaction, 37(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/http://https://doi.org/10.1002/SYMB.85

18.

Drury

Stride

Fitzgerald

Hyett-Allen

Pylypiuk

Whitford-Stark

(2022). “I’m a referee, not a female referee”: The experiences of women involved in football as coaches and referees. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 3, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.789321

19.

Eggebø

(2020). Collective qualitative approach. Norwegian Journal of Sociology, 4(2), 106–122. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2535-2512-2020-02-03

20.

Errekagorri

Castellano

Echeazarra

Lago-Peñas

(2020). The effects of video assistant referee system (VAR) on the playing time, technical-tactical and physical performance in elite soccer. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 20(5), 808–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2020.1788350

21.

Forbes

Edwards

Fleming

(2015). “Women can’t referee”: Exploring the experiences of female football officials within UK football culture. Soccer & Society, 16(4), 521–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660970.2014.882829

22.

Fox

M. F.

Johnson

D. G.

Rosser

S. V.

(2006). Women, gender and technology. University of Illnois Press.

23.

Garfinkel

(1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall.

24.

Gasparetto

Loktionov

(2023). Does the video assistant referee (VAR) mitigate referee bias on professional football? PLoS ONE, 18(11), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294507

25.

Goffman

(1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books.

26.

Goffman

(1967). Interaction ritual. Essays on face-to-face behavior. Anchor Books.

27.

Goffman

(1976). Gender advertisements. Red Globe Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-16079-2

28.

Grubb

Webb

Rayner

(2023). Experiences of female football referees: Using the lack of fit model to explore gender stereotypes in football in England. In Roberts

Whigham

Culvin

Parnell

(Eds.), Critical issues in football: A sociological analysis of the beautiful game (pp. 111–124). Routledge.

29.

Gubby

Martin

. (2024) Sexism, abuse and threatening behaviour: Experiences of women football referees in amateur and semi-professional men’s football in the UK. Sport, Education and Society, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2024.2324376

30.

Han

Chen

Lago-Peñas

Wang

Liu

(2020). The influence of the video assistant referee on the Chinese super league. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 15(5–6), 662–668. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954120938984

31.

Heritage

(1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Polity Press.

32.

Holder

Ehrmann

König

(2021). Monitoring experts: Insights from the introduction of video assistant referee (VAR) in elite football. Journal of Business Economics, 92(1), 285–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-021-01058-5

33.

Jones

Edwards

L. L.

(2013). The woman in black: Exposing sexist beliefs about female officials in elite men’s football. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 7(2), 202–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2013.777771

34.

Kim

Hong

(2016). A red card for women: Female officials ostracized in South Korean football. Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 22(2), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/12259276.2016.1168156

35.

Lago-Peñas

Ezequiel

Anton

(2019). How does video assistant referee (VAR) modify the game in elite soccer? International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 19(4), 646–653. https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2019.1646521

36.

Lago-Peñas

Gómez

M. A.

Pollard

(2021). The effect of the video assistant referee on referee’s decisions in the Spanish LaLiga. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 16(3), 824–829. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954120980111

37.

Livingston

Forbes

S. L.

Wattie

Cunningham

(2020). Sports officiating: Recruitment, development, and retention. Routledge.

38.

Mather

(2020). A step to VAR: The vision science of offside calls by video assistant referee. Perception, 49(12), 1371–1374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006620972006

39.

Miller

Glassner

(2004). The “inside” and the “outside”: Finding realities in interviews. In Silverman

(Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (pp. 125–139). Sage.

40.

Peterson-Wagner

Ludvigsen

J. A. L.

(2023). The video assistant referee (VAR) as neo-coloniality of power? Fan negative reactions to VAR in the 2018 FIFA Men’s World Cup. Sport in Society, 26(5), 869–883. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2022.2070481

41.

Pizzera

Laborde

Lahey

Wahl

(2022). Influence of physical and psychological stress on decision-making performance of soccer referees. Journal of Sport Sciences, 40(18), 2037–2046. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2022.2127516

42.

Reid

Dallaire

(2019). “Because there are so few of us”: The marginalization of female soccer referees in Ontario. Canada. Women in Sport & Physical Activity Journal, 27(1), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1123/wspaj.2017-0031

43.

Reid

Dallaire

(2020). “I’d like to think I’m a good referee”: Discourses of ability and the subjectivity of the female soccer referee in Ontario (Canada). Soccer & Society, 21(7), 762–777. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660970.2020.1742705

44.

Royce

(2012). Refereeing and technology: Reflections on Collins’ proposals. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 39(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2012.675066

45.

Scanlon

Griggs

McGillick

(2022). “It’s not even football anymore”: Perceptions of the video assistant referee by English premier league football fans. Soccer & Society, 23(8), 1084–1096. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660970.2022.2033731

46.

Skirbekk

(2023). Video assistant referee (VAR), gender and football refereeing: A scoping review. Soccer and Society, 25(3), 360–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/14660970.2023.2256231

47.

Skirbekk

(2025). "I feel I must work harder and still be overlooked" - How the implementation of video assistant referee (VAR) influences gendered recruitment and working conditions in elite football refereeing. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/10126902241310615

48.

Tamir

Bar-Eli

(2021). The moral gatekeeper: Soccer and technology, the case of video assistant referee (VAR). Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.613469

49.

Tjønndal

Turtiainen

Frandsen

Rogstad

E. T.

(2025). Women in a digitized sports culture: Nordic perspectives. Routledge.

50.

Tjønndal

Wågan

F. A.

Alsarve

(2022). Hockey dads, party boys, and devoted players? Digital representations of men and masculinities amongst Norwegian and Swedish ice hockey players. Men and Masculinities, 26(1), 134–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X221148205

51.

Van den Berg

Surujlal

(2020). Video assistant referee: Spectator and fan perceptions and experiences. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Studies, 12(2), 449–465. https://sobiad.org/eJOURNALS/journal_IJSS/arhieves/IJSS-2020-2_ek/liandi-berg.pdf

52.

Wajcman

Young

Fitzmaurice

(2020). The digital revolution: Implications for gender equality and women’s rights 25 years after Beijing. Report, UN Women, no. 36.

53.

Webb

O’Gorman

Markham

(2021a). Striving for excellence: Talent identification and development in English football refereeing. European Sport Management Quarterly, 23(2), 351–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2020.1864748

54.

Webb

Rayner

Cleland

O’Gorman

(2021b). Referees, match officials and abuse: Research and implications for policy. Routledge Focus.

55.

Wicker

Cunningham

G. B.

Webb

(2024). Factors affecting women sport officials’ intention to league across Europe. Journal of Sport Management, 38(6), 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsm.2023-0162

56.

Winand

Schneiders

Merten

Marlier

(2021). Sports fans and innovation: An analysis of football fans’ satisfaction with video assistant refereeing through social identity and argumentative theories. Journal of Business Research, 136, 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.07.029

57.

Zglinski

(2020). Rules, standards, and the video assistant referee in football. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 16(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2020.1857823

58.

Zhang

Gómez-Ruano

Memmert

(2022). The effect of video assistant referee (VAR) on referees’ decisions at FIFA Women’s World Cups. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.984367

“It Comes Down to Strength and Stamina”: Video Assistant Referee and the Reproduction of Masculine Performance in Football Refereeing

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Literature Review

Football Refereeing and Gender

VAR in Football

Analytical Framework

Social Interaction as Performance

Hegemonic Masculinity

Methods

Participants

Procedure

Analytical Approach

Findings and Discussion

What Makes a Good Football Referee?

VAR and the Changing Dynamics of Football Refereeing

VAR and the Reproduction of Masculine Performance

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Notes

Author Biographies

References