Christian Pulisic's late winner for the Blues against the Hammers was spoken by Janusz Michallik. (1:21) The Video Assistant Referee (VAR) causes controversy every week in the Premier League, but how are decisions made and are they correct? We take a look at the most high-profile incidents and examine the process in terms of VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game after each weekend. The weekend saw a number of incidents wrapped up in just two matches. Alisson had two red cards in one game.
- How VAR has affected every Premier League club
- VAR in the Premier League: Ultimate guide
There is a chance of a penalty: Cedric handball.
What happened: In the 23rd minute, Jadon Sancho attempted to burst into the box ahead of Cedric Soares, but he was stopped. The defender had lost his balance and was crawling as he tried to avoid the other. Martin Odegaard was able to collect the ball after it hit the hand of Cedric.
The VAR decision was not a penalty. The VAR, Jarret Gillet, ruled that no spot kick should be given because the arm position of Cedric was justified by his body movement.
If referee Craig Pawson had awarded it on the field of play, it would have stayed as a penalty. Had it been awarded, it could have resulted in a red card for Cedric for denying a goal- scoring opportunity.
There are two points that the VAR took into account when making a decision.
Not every contact between the hand and the ball is a handball offence.
- Referees must judge the "validity'" of the hand/arm's position in relation to what the player is doing in that particular situation.
Having fallen to the floor, it was logical that his arm would be where it was. Guidance given to referees says that this should not be considered a crime.
There is a question of a deliberate act of handball, which would supersede any other consideration. Did he scoop the ball instead of hitting his arm? No one would have been surprised if the VAR advised a red card here, but the high bar of the league ensures we don't always get the decision we might expect.
The goal was disallowed against Nketiah.
Penalty: Foul by Telles on Saka
Eddie Nketiah thought he had scored a second goal, which would have given him a 2-0 lead. As the ball was played through, Alex Telles challenged Bukayo Saka to the ground.
The VAR reviewed the goal and found that Nketiah was not in the game. The goal was not allowed. A penalty was awarded after a second review for the Telles challenge.
Nketiah was ahead of the last defender when the ball hit the ground, so the first decision to disallow the goal was correct. The penalty decision is more subjective.
It is an area of VAR which will always bring perceived inconsistencies, because each VAR is making judgements on individual situations, taking into account what the referee says he has seen. VARs will have their own subjective judgement just as referees will disagree on penalty incidents.
There is no doubt that when Telles uses his upper body to send the forward off balance, Saka is about to control the ball. If Nketiah's shot was saved by David de Gea, would this have resulted in a VAR penalty?
Nketiah was allowed to run for the goal despite the fact that referee Pawson had already judged the challenge as a penalty. The goal can't be allowed once Nketiah has scored. The referee thought it was a penalty when he reviewed the incident at the monitor, but the VAR still had to go through the protocol of reviewing the incident.
United fans will ask about the challenges on Anthony Elanga after the penalty is awarded. Gillet decided that it was not a clear and obvious error by the referee. The challenge from Telles on Saka was more aggressive and there was no attempt to play the ball. On the first there was an arm on the shoulder, and on the second there was an arm on the shoulder. VAR Gillet would not have advised the referee he had made an error if the referee had given a penalty.
The goal was disallowed.
After he scored, the flag went up, but he thought he had made it 2-2.
The VAR upheld the decision of the linesman, who said that Ben White was marginally ahead ofRonaldo.
At the start of the season, there was a change to the way VAR is used in all the major leagues and in the U.S. $$$[y Leagues to remove "toenail" offsides. There will always be a point when a player is 0.1 cm off the ground.
If the blue defensive and red attacking lines don't touch, there is an obstruction. If the lines touch, a single green line is used to show that an attacker is onside.
This is one of the closest decisions we have seen, but the lines don't touch so the only decision can be wrong.
It is similar to the 78th-minute goal that was ruled out by the referee for being marginally ahead of the last defender. We have seen many decisions like this, and they aren't popular with fans, but the line has to be drawn somewhere.
The goal was allowed against Nketiah.
Granit Xhaka scored the third goal of the game in the 70th minute. The shot was hit and Nketiah appeared to be in the wrong place.
The goal was allowed to stand because Nketiah was not close to the goalkeeper and the ball was too far away to have an impact on the goal.
Subjective offside, when a player is in the line of vision of the goalkeeper, has been a big talking point this season. When the VAR feels there is a clear offence, it will be left to the on-field officials.
The decision on whether a goal is a goal or not is taken on the field. The VAR didn't get involved because the decisions were not subjectively wrong.
The Nketiah situation is similar to several others we have seen, and the VAR has not advised an overturn due to the distance the ball has traveled, which means the goalkeeper has time to react.
These include, but are not limited to.
- Rodrigo's goal for Leeds against Norwich
- Mateo Kovacic's goal for Chelsea against
- Daniel Podence's goal for Wolves against Leicester
Whether a goalkeeper will save the ball is not a factor. The goal would not have been allowed by the VAR if the assistant had disallowed it.
There is a chance of a red card for the challenge on Tavares.
Bruno Fernandes caught Tavares with a late challenge in the 76th minute, when the game was already decided. The Portugal international was given a yellow card by the referee.
There was no red card. The yellow card should not be upgraded.
The high threshold for interventions and how VAR is used in the premier league are the main factors in the VAR review. This should have been a red card for him.
In January 2021, he caught Xhaka after the ball had gone in the meeting between these sides.
The VAR will look at the referee's decision to show a yellow card. The contact on the ankle by Fernandes was not high above the ankle, and did not have a high level of force. It would not be considered a clear and obvious error to show a yellow card.
The issue is that he only wants to make contact with his opponent, and he does so with the sole of his boot leading. He does not even begin his challenge until the ball is gone.
The high bar of the Premier League makes it difficult for the VAR to advise a red card, but you would expect this to be a red card in any other top league.
There is a chance of a red card on Holgate.
The players from both teams had a heated exchange after Richarlison was down for an extended period. After an altercation with Allan and Mason Holgate, Sadio Mane was booked for adopting an aggressive attitude.
The VAR did not advise the referee to go to the monitor after the two incidents were deemed worthy of a red card.
The VAR review is about how referees judge players who raise their hands and the limitations of VAR protocol.
It used to be that if a player raised his hands to another player, it was a red-card offence. The level of force used will now be taken into account by the referee. Only a yellow card will be shown if this is not present.
The on-pitch refereeing team saw one instance in which Mane raised his hands, and he was booked for this. Why wasn't Attwell told about the second? It would only be a yellow card and the VAR can't do anything about it. Only direct red cards can be advised by the VAR.
Matip on Gordon is a possible penalty.
Anthony Gordon went down in the box under a challenge fromJoel Matip. There were claims for a penalty waved away by the referee.
It was ruled not to be a clear and obvious error by the referee after it was reviewed for a possible penalty.
A lot of people may feel that this should have been a penalty, and there is no doubt that it would have been overturned if Attwell had pointed to the spot. We are once again at the high threshold in the premier league.
We have seen many incidents like this throughout the season, and it is not unlike the first incident between Elanga and Tavares in the Man United game.
The VAR chose not to advise a pitchside review for a penalty because there wasn't conclusive evidence in the replays of a clear foul by Matip. It appears to be consistent with other VAR decisions.
Richarlison may have a red card.
Richarlison pushed his leg into Jordan Henderson in the first minute of added time.
The VAR decision was not judged to be incorrect because the referee had shown a yellow card.
The key factor is that Richarlison did not pull his leg back and connect with Henderson, thus using force as part of the challenge.
Richarlison was definitely high on Henderson, but this was more a consequence of how he fell to the ground rather than a conscious raising of the leg. It would not have been a red card if Attwell had sent the player off the field, as it was not considered to have the intensity necessary to warrant a VAR red card.
Romelu was dragged back inside the box in the 85th minute and that's when the penalty was awarded. The referee showed a card to Craig.
The VAR told Oliver that he should upgrade the yellow card to a red for denying a clear goal- scoring opportunity and that he should also have been sent off. When the offence is pulling, triple jeopardy doesn't apply because a player is only booked inside the area for denying a clear goal- scoring opportunity.
Was it a clear mistake for Oliver to only show a yellow card? It is hard to say if it was, because we have discussed other incidents under this banner and the high bar for intervention in the league.
You can argue that there was a clear goal- scoring opportunity for Romelu Lukaku, but you can also argue that Lukasz Fabianski would have had to make a save.
It reminds us that the subjectivity of the VAR is important. This would not have been advised as a red card on another day. He can count himself unlucky to miss the game because of his suspension. It doesn't mean the red card is incorrect, just that it probably wasn't necessary for the VAR to get involved
The information provided by the league was used in the story.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
