Brentford head coach Keith Andrews has urged football to restore human judgement to the centre of officiating. After his side’s hard-fought 2-1 Carabao Cup victory over League One Reading, Andrews argued that video assistant referee technology is stopping match officials from making clear decisions. His message was simple and direct: let them ref the games and be humans.
The comments come at a sensitive moment for English football. Only days earlier a high-profile VAR error in the Manchester derby allowed an Erling Haaland goal to stand despite an offside player’s involvement. Andrews described that incident as “pretty alarming” and linked it to a broader pattern in which referees appear reluctant to intervene in key areas of the pitch.
Context of the Carabao Cup Tie
Brentford travelled to Reading in the third round of the EFL Cup and emerged with a place in the last 16. The match was played without VAR, as is standard at this stage of the competition. Despite the absence of the technology, Andrews still voiced dissatisfaction with some of the on-field decisions. He used the post-match platform to address a wider issue that has frustrated coaches, players and supporters across the Premier League and beyond.
“It’s been a tough week for officials as everybody is probably aware,” Andrews said. “I think we just need to let them ref the game and be human beings and make decisions. We have gone through a period in the game where I feel like they weren’t actually making decisions in both boxes because of the technology we have in the game and I feel like that is a real shame.”
His remarks highlight a growing sense that constant scrutiny and the fear of being overturned have changed how referees approach their role. Instead of applying the laws with confidence, many appear to wait for confirmation from the monitor or the VAR room.
The Human Element Under Pressure
Andrews drew on his own experience as a former professional player. He recalled a time when relationships between officials and participants were built on mutual respect and open conversation. In that environment, referees were permitted to make occasional mistakes without the decision being endlessly dissected and corrected in real time.
“I always felt as a player, when there was a relationship with an official that was built on respect and being able to speak to each other in a certain way,” he explained. “We’ve gone away from allowing them to officiate and allowing them to make mistakes and I think it is a real shame. Now they are having to go back to that and it’s not the habits they have had in recent years.”
The coach’s observation reflects a widely shared concern. Technology was introduced to eliminate clear and obvious errors. Over time, however, the threshold for intervention has sometimes appeared inconsistent, and the psychological effect on on-field officials has become more pronounced. When every decision is potentially subject to microscopic review, hesitation can replace instinct.
Wider Debate Around Technology and Authority
The Manchester derby incident has intensified the discussion. Pro Ref, the body responsible for Premier League officials, stood down the VAR team involved until after the international break and issued an apology to Manchester United. Chief refereeing officer Howard Webb expressed disappointment at the outcome. Yet for managers such as Andrews, the episode is symptomatic of a deeper problem rather than an isolated lapse.
Supporters of VAR maintain that the system has improved overall accuracy on offsides, red-card decisions and penalty incidents. Critics counter that the constant interruptions and the public nature of reviews have eroded the authority of the referee and slowed the natural flow of matches. Andrews sits firmly in the latter camp, arguing that the human capacity to make real-time judgements has been diminished.
Transitioning from specific complaints to principle, the Brentford manager is essentially calling for a cultural shift. He wants officials empowered to apply the laws as they see them, accepting that perfection is impossible. Mistakes will still occur, yet the alternative—a climate of caution and delayed decisions—may be more damaging to the spectacle and the spirit of the game.
Implications for Coaches and Players
Andrews’ comments also touch on the practical realities of modern coaching. Managers prepare detailed tactical plans and expect consistent application of the rules. When decisions in both penalty areas become unpredictable or overly cautious, the ability to plan and react suffers. Players, meanwhile, must constantly second-guess whether a challenge will be reviewed or whether an advantage will be played.
By speaking out after a cup tie that did not even feature VAR, Andrews signalled that the issue transcends any single competition or technological setup. The habits formed under the current system, he suggested, are now affecting how referees operate even when the technology is absent.
A Call for Balance Rather Than Abolition
Importantly, Andrews did not demand the complete removal of video assistance. His focus remained on restoring the referee’s central role and allowing human judgement room to operate. The phrase “let them ref the games and be humans” encapsulates that balance: technology as a safety net rather than a substitute for authority.
As the Premier League season continues and the Carabao Cup progresses, the conversation is unlikely to fade. Officials face intense scrutiny every weekend. Coaches will continue to seek clarity and consistency. Fans want fewer stoppages and greater trust in the people charged with controlling the match.
Keith Andrews has articulated a view held by many inside the game. Referees are human. They will make mistakes. The challenge for football is to create an environment in which they can still make decisions with confidence, dignity and the respect that the role traditionally commanded. Only then, the Brentford coach argues, will the game recover a healthier relationship between technology, officials and the contest itself.
