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.
In this week’s VAR Review: Looking at two penalty claims for Newcastle United in their 3-3 draw with Liverpool. Plus, VAR learns from its mistakes as Southampton‘s Jack Stephens is sent off vs. Chelsea, and how assistant referees are being fast-tracked into the video chair.
Possible penalty: Quansah challenge on Isak
What happened: Alexander Isak broke into the area in the 77th minute and went down under a challenge from Jarell Quansah, The Newcastle United striker wanted a penalty, but referee Andy Madley allowed play to continue. It was looked at by the VAR, Stuart Attwell.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR review: The law was changed in the summer of 2023 to make it very difficult to get a red card for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (DOGSO) unless an opponent has been clearly pulled back. For example, when Southampton‘s Ryan Yates tugged back Leicester City striker Jamie Vardy as he was about to score.
It’s possible to avoid a DOGSO red card even if you haven’t attempted a tackle, because a clause was added to cover challenging an opponent, and not just the ball.
But this must be right on the borderline, and it was a big early test for Hopton, the other official who is usually running the line, in his first game as lead VAR.
VAR review: Last weekend, Southampton were furious that they had a goal ruled out at Brighton & Hove Albion when an offside Adam Armstrong had attempted to play a ball before it went to the goal scorer, Cameron Archer.
That, of course, leads to questions when, just five days later, Villa’s goal stood in similar circumstances.
Yet as discussed in Monday’s VAR Review, on incidents such as this it’s the decision on the field which is so important, as both outcomes — offside and onside — can be supportable in law.
We saw this earlier in the season when an Arsenal goal was allowed to stand when the offside Mikel Merino made a small jump to the ball before Gabriel Martinelli scored against Southampton. Decision on the field: onside.
In truth, the better on-field call for the Armstrong situation would have been a goal, as that favours attacking football but still allows the VAR to step in on a clear offence. It doesn’t stop all the arguments: remember when Bruno Fernandes scored for Manchester United against Manchester City and Marcus Rashford was controversially ruled to be onside, and the VAR couldn’t say that was subjectively wrong.
Verdict: Another big incident on debut for one of the assistant referees acting as a VAR.
While there’s definitely an argument for offside, as Watkins does make an obvious action, Pinnock did flick the ball on in front of him. Watkins wasn’t close enough to Pinnock to be considered challenging for offside, though that could have been given on-field too.
The Pinnock flick would itself have had an impact upon Kevin Schade, who was marking Cash, and that reduced the influence of Watkins’ jump.
So, like all the incidents listed, the VAR stuck with the on-field decision. A good example of a subjective offside intervention was for Manchester City’s winner at Wolves, when Bernardo Siva clearly was not in the line of vision of José Sá, and the on-field decision to disallow the goal was changed.
Some factual parts of this article include information provided by the Premier League and PGMOL.
