Video Assistant Referee causes controversy every week in the Premier League, but how are decisions made, and are they correct?
After each weekend we take a look at the major incidents to examine and explain the process both in terms of VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game.
– How VAR decisions have affected every Prem club in 2023-24
– VAR in the Premier League: Ultimate guide
In this week’s VAR Review: Should Kai Havertz‘s penalty have been overturned, and why wasn’t AFC Bournemouth‘s goal awarded or Ryan Christie sent off? Plus, why did Manchester City get their first penalty against Wolverhampton Wanderers?
VAR review: There are often games in which one team gets the rub of the green when it comes to truly subjective decisions, those that could go either way so won’t be overturned whatever the referee has given. In fact, in this very fixture last season it was Arsenal who felt the aggrieved party — five possible penalty situations weren’t given by the referee or the VAR. This time, Bournemouth will feel two key calls went against them.
VAR review: You can argue that this was as soft as the Havertz penalty, and Bournemouth boss Andoni Iraola had valid complaints — yet the VAR isn’t likely to overturn this once given. Again, with a lower bar it might be the kind of situation that goes to the monitor.
We’ve seen similar instances where there has been contact on the goalkeeper and the goal has been allowed to stand. But as usual, the weight is with the on-field decision, not creating consistency with previous on-field calls.
It’s not as clear cut as the decision to rule out Chelsea‘s late goal at Aston Villa last weekend, when Benoît Badiashile knocked into Diego Carlos and the goal was ruled out through VAR. But Solanke does appear to bump Raya off the line of the ball as it drops, meaning he doesn’t get a true fist to clear it.
VAR review: There’s no other way to dress this up: it was a bad on-field decision. There was contact by the defender on the attacker after a shot had been taken — but this is so rarely given as a penalty. Even if it is, it tends to be because of a clear reckless act (as was the case when Man City goalkeeper Éderson fouled Arsenal‘s Eddie Nketiah for a spot kick last season).
This was more of a coming together after Gvardiol had taken the shot. Pawson shouldn’t have awarded the spot kick, but once he has, there’s very little place for the VAR to go as Aït-Nouri goes into Gvardiol.
It shouldn’t be a penalty, but with the way VAR works, it’s never likely to get overturned.
VAR review: A clear decision for Attwell, and perhaps learnings from his failure to intervene on Ashley Young‘s foul on Callum Hudson-Odoi in Everton vs. Nottingham Forest on April 21.
Semedo kicks the right leg of Haaland as the striker is lining up to shoot, which sends him off his running line.
This would be classed as an attempt to challenge for the ball, so Semedo isn’t sent off.
VAR review: This looked close, with the cut of the grass making it look like the ball would be level with Groß.
Yet that was misleading, as the ball was level with the line of the 6-yard box, while the boot of Aston Villa defender Diego Carlos was marginally in front.
The VAR, Michael Oliver, still had to check both the ball and Carlos to be sure Groß was in front of both, which led to a longer review. It’s the kind of situation that semi-automated offside technology wouldn’t completely fix; the ball isn’t tracked, so the VAR would need to use the old system, which is still in place as a backup.
There was a clear gap between the attacking and defensive lines. While the vertical line to Groß may not appear to be straight, this is due the camera angles as the tech is mapped to the pitch.
Possible penalty overturn: Konsa foul on Adingra
What happened: Brighton were given the chance to score from the spot in the 85th minute when Simon Adingra went down under a challenge from Ezri Konsa. Referee Robert Jones pointed to the spot.
VAR decision: Penalty stands, scored on the rebound by Joao Pedro.
VAR review: Aston Villa boss Unai Emery was frustrated that this penalty was allowed to stand, especially as he had claims for a spot kick in the second minute for a challenge by Facundo Buonanotte on Morgan Rogers (watch here). It’s the perfect example of how VAR can produce different outcomes — one a penalty; the other not — for similar situations.
VAR review: If there’s mutual holding by both players, that can often lead to a VAR review not taking place. This provides the perfect illustration of the opposite, with Branthwaite at no stage trying to grapple with his opponent and Mengi having both arms around his waist. There was no intention to play the ball by the Luton player, and it was an obvious VAR intervention.
VAR review: Last month Burnley wanted a spot kick against Brighton when Wilson Odobert appeared to be felled by Pervis Estupiñán. That looked a stronger claim, yet the Premier League’s Independent Key Match Incidents Panel unanimously voted that the VAR was right not to get involved.
Burnley have a case, as Guimarães takes a risk with his challenge and had a hand on Assignon’s back; it wouldn’t have been overturned if awarded.
VAR review: Last week Dejan Kulusevski went down after his foot clipped Leandro Trossard‘s leg. This week, Gordon got a penalty after his trailing leg touched Brownhill and caused him to trip over his own heels. Brownhill did have a piece of Gordon’s shirt too.
As explained in last Monday’s VAR Review, these will only ever be given on field.
