Prem panel backs VAR over Wolves controversy against Fulham

The Premier League’s independent Key Match Incidents panel said Stuart Attwell made all the correct VAR decisions during Fulham’s controversial 3-2 home win over Wolverhampton Wanderers on Monday.

The results, seen by ESPN, indicate that referee Michael Salisbury made two errors against Wolves, but those errors were not clear and obvious for VAR to intervene.

Wolves boss Gary O’Neil was furious after the match, believing Fulham’s first penalty should have been overturned by VAR, while the home side’s match-winning kick in stoppage time should not have been given after examination. He also felt that Carlos Vinicius should have been sent off for a header on Max Kilman, and Tim Ream was shown a second yellow card for the foul on Hwang Hee-Chan which gave Wolves their penalty.

– Stream on ESPN+: LaLiga, Bundesliga, more (US)

Fulham led 2-1 in the 59th minute thanks to Willian’s first penalty after a challenge from Nélson Semedo on Tom Cairney. The contact appeared minimal and O’Neil said Salisbury told him afterward that he “regretted not being sent on screen” to knock him down. But the panel supported Attwell’s decision not to intervene on a split 3-2 vote, saying it was not a clear and obvious error.

Soon after, Wolves had the chance to equalize when Ream, who was on a yellow card, brought down Hwang, and it was said that the challenge did not fall within the definition of denying a goal-scoring opportunity and so shouldn’t be a second. caution.

In the 88th minute, Vinicius appeared to place his head into Kilman as he stood up. Again, there was a split vote of 3-2 in favor of VAR’s decision not to advise a red card for violent conduct, as it was not a clear and obvious error. This is the third time this season that Vinicius has escaped a red card for a violent act.

Fulham won the game in injury time when Harry Wilson ran past João Gomes and crashed inside the box. Attwell told Salisbury to go to the monitor to change his decision, and Willian intervened to win the match. The panel voted 4-1 that this was a correct use of VAR, as there was “evidence of upper leg contact”.

However, the panel believes that Salisbury should not have awarded the first penalty (4-1 vote) and should have sent off Vinicius (3-2 vote), while awarding the injury time penalty.

The panel is made up of five members, made up of three former players and/or coaches, plus one representative each from the Premier League and PGMOL. It was created at the start of last season to give an independent assessment of decision-making rather than relying on the views of PGMOL or the clubs themselves. The judgment aims to provide an independent assessment of all major match-related incidents.

Wolves have been on the wrong end of a series of poor VAR decisions this season, leading to O’Neil’s exasperation with the process.

“We’re probably seven points behind the PGMOL critics, depending on what they come back with this time,” he said. “So that’s the difference between 22 and 15 points on my reputation at a big club, trying to build myself up as a new manager. The difference between 15 and 22 is irreparable.

“Maybe with just a human referee one of the penalties could have gone against us, but the fact that we conceded two, for me VAR doesn’t help with subjective decisions. Maybe Tonight finally turned me against VAR.”

Wolves have had three VAR errors recorded against them this season. They should have been awarded an injury-time penalty in a 1-0 defeat at Manchester United on the opening weekend, while incorrect penalties were awarded to Newcastle United (2-2 draw ) and Sheffield United (winner in injury time for 2-1). ) before the international break.

This is the second consecutive matchweek that the panel recorded no errors from VAR, although they felt referee Sam Barrott should have awarded Burnley an on-field kick for the displacement of Vladimír Coufal on Luca Koleosho. All other VAR decisions and interventions were deemed correct.

The VAR penalty given to Nottingham Forest against Brighton, when Jack Hinshelwood was adjudged to have restrained Callum Hudson-Odoi, was only supported by a split vote of 3-2, with two members believing there was no “no sustained maintenance and the situation was not clear and obvious.”

So far this season, the panel has recorded two incorrect throws, one bad overthrow thrown away and 13 missed throws in the first 13 game weeks.

The panel also ruled that Newcastle United’s controversial goal against Arsenal was not a mistake.