In a recent episode of Pikk ette, ise järele, football journalists Raul Ojassaar and Kristjan Jaak Kangur, together with former Estonian international Markus Jürgenson, discussed one of the season’s most debated issues — the question of trust in referees and the role of VAR in the Estonian Premium liiga.
The discussion followed several controversial offside calls, including one that ruled out Paide Linnameeskond’s goal against FC Flora. According to referee department head Hannes Kaasik, the decision was later confirmed to have been incorrect by post-match analysis, although the error was marginal — a few centimetres. The podcast panelists unpacked both the incident and the broader problems of perception, consistency, and communication in Estonian officiating.
VAR’s limits and the perception of fairness
The guests agreed that while the introduction of VAR had improved the accuracy of key decisions, it had also created new frustrations. Ojassaar noted that many supporters misunderstand the technology’s function: it is designed to intervene only when there is clear and obvious evidence of an error.
As he pointed out, that standard often clashes with fan expectations: “People want mathematical certainty, but in football that doesn’t exist — not even with lines or replays.”
Kangur argued that such moments expose how little communication there is between officials and the public. He said that when supporters see long VAR checks without explanation, speculation fills the void. Jürgenson agreed, suggesting that even correct decisions fail to convince audiences if the process remains opaque: “If fans don’t understand what’s being checked, they won’t trust the outcome.”
Jürgenson, drawing on his playing experience, emphasised that referees are still under enormous pressure despite the technology. He described VAR as “a tool that reduces, but never eliminates, human judgment.” Kangur added that the lack of visual aids — such as calibrated lines seen in top European leagues — leaves Estonian reviews more subjective. “Even when the right call is made, people see an image that looks different from what the referee saw, and that’s where the controversy begins,” he said.
All three agreed that the perception of fairness often matters more than technical accuracy. Ojassaar summarised the point: “The debate isn’t only about whether the call was correct — it’s about whether people believe it was fair.”
Calls for greater transparency
The conversation also turned to possible reforms. Kangur proposed that the Estonian Football Association could publish post-match explanations of major decisions, similar to what UEFA and FIFA do in international tournaments. Jürgenson supported that idea, adding that hearing referees’ reasoning — even briefly — would humanise the process and reduce hostility.
While acknowledging that mistakes will always occur, the panelists said that consistent standards and better communication would help rebuild public confidence. As Kangur put it, “The goal should be that after a controversial call, people understand why it was made, even if they don’t agree.”
The discussion also ranged beyond refereeing, touching on how media narratives, fan reactions, and league management collectively shape the public’s trust in Estonian football. The speakers reflected on the balance between criticism and education in sports journalism, the need for better communication between clubs and supporters, and the importance of developing a more professional environment for referees, coaches, and young players alike.
