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 affected every Prem club in 2022-23
– VAR’s wildest moments: Alisson’s two red cards in one game
– VAR in the Premier League: Ultimate guide
JUMP TO: Liverpool vs. Newcastle | Arsenal vs. Aston Villa | Fulham vs. Brighton
VAR overturn: Penalty for handball cancelled
What happened: In the 16th minute, referee Peter Bankes awarded a penalty to Tottenham Hotspur for handball against West Ham United defender Aaron Cresswell.
VAR decision: Penalty overturned, Cresswell handball covered by an exception in the laws.
VAR review: On the face of it this had all the hallmarks of the penalty given by the VAR for handball by Aston Villa‘s Lucas Digne against Crystal Palace earlier in the season. Cresswell had his arm above shoulder height and the ball hit it from close proximity — except there is one key difference.
When Harry Kane headed the ball towards goal, it came off Cresswell’s face and onto his outstretched arm. In the case of Digne, the ball directly hit his arm (though it was a very harsh VAR decision.)
VAR decision: No VAR intervention possible.
VAR review: VAR protocol doesn’t allow for a review of any kind of restart (other than a penalty kick.) This also includes the ball moving on a free kick, not being in the quadrant on a corner or in the correct position. It’s down to referee Bankes and his assistant, who was close to Coufal.
The IFAB VAR manual states: “In general, incorrect restarts … are not reviewed unless they are a serious misapplication of the Laws of the Game. Because they are not match-changing decisions and should be detected by the match officials.”
Goal disallowed: Isak offside
What happened: Alexander Isak burst through to put Newcastle United 2-0 up at Liverpool in the 54th minute but the flag went up for offside (watch here.)
VAR decision: Decision upheld.
VAR review: As with all the other such VAR decisions this season, the process remains simple. If the lines for the attacker and defender touch, onside will be given.
There is a clear gap between the lines, and it’s not as close as other recent decisions such as Chelsea‘s Kai Havertz against Leicester City and Arsenal‘s Gabriel Jesus against AFC Bournemouth.
If this image were to show Isak was onside, the striker’s knee would be in advance of the vertical line. The VAR cannot go against the technology, which is mapped to each pitch individually.
It’s the same for Demarai Gray‘s disallowed goal for Everton at Leeds on Tuesday evening. The gap between the lines is even clearer on this decision; the attacker has to be offside (watch here.) As with Isak, the offside flag was raised by the assistant and the decision upheld by the VAR.
No two offside decisions are ever the same — they are unique incidents. So it’s futile to argue if one situation is given as onside, then Isak and/or Gray should be too.
Yoane Wissa, meanwhile, was clearly onside for Brentford‘s equaliser at Crystal Palace (watch here.)
Possible penalty: Mings foul on Saka
What happened: The score was goalless in the 20th minute when Bukayo Saka went to ground claiming for a penalty after Tyrone Mings was holding him inside the area. Referee Robert Jones waved away appeals for a penalty.
VAR decision: No penalty
VAR review: We had another holding incident at the weekend, when Wolverhampton Wanderers‘ Matheus Nunes held onto the shirt and arm of Newcastle United‘s Sean Longstaff inside the area. Then the VAR didn’t advise a penalty when he probably should have, due to the shirt being pulled away from the body.
This is a similar kind of incident, as it’s covered by the law around holding onto a opponent.
Mings has one arm around Saka and is certainly holding onto him, but is it an offence for which Arsenal should have been awarded a penalty? The VAR, Darren England, will be asking what the referee has seen, if he has a clear view of the holding and then assess how much that holding may have impacted Saka.
Key considerations include:
– if the opponent is paying no attention to challenging for the ball.
– if the pulling or holding clearly prevents movement and the ability to challenge for the ball.
VAR decision: No foul, goal stands,
VAR review: If you take this incident and compare it to Leicester City‘s disallowed goal at Chelsea on Saturday, you’d probably say the decisions should have been the other way around: the Villa goal should be ruled out and Daniel Amartey‘s at Stamford Bridge allowed.
It’s a classic example of the referee’s decision on the pitch carrying the weight in VAR decisions — whichever way the referee goes, the VAR wouldn’t intervene.
VAR decision: Penalty, converted by Alexis Mac Allister.
VAR review: An easy decision for the VAR, Paul Tierney, as Bramall hadn’t seen that De Cordova-Reid had kicked through Estupinan in his attempt to win the ball. A clear penalty.
