The VAR Review: Jesus penalty; handballs by Saliba, McTominay،
The 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 stock of major incidents, to examine and explain the process both in terms of the VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game.
– How VAR decisions affected each Prem club in 2023-24
– VAR in the Premier League: Ultimate Guide
In this week’s VAR review: Should Robert Sánchez have conceded a penalty for his challenge on Gabriel Jesus? Plus handball decisions involving William Saliba, Michael Keane and Scott McTominay.
Possible sanction: Sanchez on Jesus
What happened: Arsenal won a free kick on the right in the 60th minute. Martin Ødegaard launched into the box and the ball was met by Takehiro Tomiyasu, who headed over the bar. However, goalkeeper Robert Sánchez rushed and collided with Gabriel Jesus as he attempted to hit the aerial ball. Referee Chris Kavanagh restarted play with a Chelsea goal kick.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR Review: Naturally, Arsenal fans argued that the challenge was no different to that of Manchester United goalkeeper Andre Onana on Wolverhampton Wanderers striker Sasa Kalajdzic. This incident occurred in the final moments of the season opener at Old Trafford, with VAR failing to intervene and advise a penalty. This led to PGMOL recognizing that an error had been made and a spot kick should have been awarded.
But there are differences that certainly mean PGMOL will not react as it did against Onana, by removing the referee and VAR from the next round of matches.
VAR must decide whether the goalkeeper is making a genuine attempt to play the ball. This, of course, does not mean that a goalkeeper can play recklessly – which many will think Sanchez did and that could easily have been given. Unlike Onana, this is more of a borderline situation, in terms of how VAR is applied in the event of a clear and obvious error. Sanchez collides with a group of players, including Jesus and his own teammates, while trying to free himself.
There was also some holding of the shirt on Tomiyasu by Thiago Silva, but certainly not enough for a penalty.
As Onana first tried to play the ball, the Manchester United goalkeeper realized he had no chance of winning it and pulled Kalajdzic to the ground with both arms. This was an additional action of fouling an opponent after failing to win an aerial ball.
Every week, the VAR Review lists numerous incidents which have sparked a strong reaction on social networks and among experts. When these are assessed by the independent Key Matching Incidents Committee under the laws, very few are considered errors. Indeed, in the final week before the international break there were a series of controversial situations – including red cards for Pascal Groß and Mateo Kovacic, as well as a penalty against Matt Doherty – but no VAR errors was recorded.
Possible red card: Palmer challenge on Jesus
What happened: Cole Palmer was booked in the eighth minute after catching Jesus with a late challenge. But should the referee have shown the red card? The VAR initiated a check.
VAR decision: No red card.
VAR Review: It was clearly not a good tackle from the Chelsea midfielder, but it certainly doesn’t meet the threshold for a VAR intervention for a red card.
The contact was light, not above the ankle and without excessive force. A yellow card was an acceptable disciplinary outcome and the Independent Key Match Incident Panel will certainly support it. Indeed, the panel said Kovacic’s tackle on Ødegaard was not a clear and obvious error for VAR to intervene with a red card – although referee Michael Oliver should have made the decision on the ground, both for the initial red and the possible second yellow. map.
Possible penalty: Saliba handball
What happened: Raheem Sterling crossed the ball in the 11th minute, with Mykhailo Mudryk trying to score with a header under pressure from William Saliba. Chelsea players demanded a penalty when the ball hit the Arsenal defender, but referee Kavanagh continued play.
VAR decision: Penalty, scored by Palmer.
VAR Review: This is a case where the intended application of the law and what fans consider fair collide. But we now have several examples to show how such decisions are judged.
The general rule is simple: if the arm is fully extended in relation to the body, there is a very high probability that a penalty will be imposed.
While the expected arm position for the action and proximity to a player are important, these are only mitigating factors that will be overridden if the arm is well away from the body, creating an obvious barrier.
Saliba’s arm can be expected to be in this position when he jumps, but at the same time, he is considered to be taking a risk by having his arm fully extended.
We can compare it to the undelivered penalty appeal against West Ham United’s James Ward-Prowse at Luton Town: while his arm was raised, it was not fully extended or raised above the head, and for this reason he escaped a VAR review.
Then there’s Nicolas Jackson, who also avoided a penalty review in the opening weekend of the season against Liverpool, largely because the ball was sent to him from close range. So we come back to proximity? Partly, but also Jackson’s arm was close to his body rather than being fully extended.
Compare that to the kick Wolves gave away at Luton, when João Gomes made a block and the ball deflected onto his arm, which was raised above his head. Although the ball was deflected away from his own body, the arm so high negated that mitigating factor.
As explained in a VAR review in August, it is always likely that there will be borderline decisions and that was the case with Cristian Romero’s eventual handball for Tottenham Hotspur against Manchester United. While Romero’s arm was away from the body, it was saved as it was not fully extended, unlike Saliba and Gomes.
The panel has yet to rule that a VAR decision regarding a defensive handball decision was incorrect this season.
Possible penalty: Foul by Patterson on Diaz
What happened: Luis Díaz wanted a penalty in the 70th minute when he felt caught by Nathan Patterson. Referee Craig Pawson was not interested in a spot kick.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR Review: This remains consistent with criticism of VAR regarding penalties this season. While there may have been a little touch from Patterson as he slid in to block a likely cross from Diaz, it didn’t seem like enough to get him into the air.
While we’ve seen penalties awarded by the referee for a little contact – seeing Dominik Szoboszlai fall to the ground under a challenge from AFC Bournemouth’s Joe Rothwell – this isn’t usually the case with VAR.
Possible penalty: Keane handball
What happened: Diaz attempted to cross the area and the ball hit Michael Keane’s outstretched arm. Referee Pawson chose not to award the penalty but the VAR, David Coote, quickly got involved (look here.)
VAR decision: Penalty, scored by Mohamed Salah.
VAR Review: An easy decision for VAR, and one that really should have been made by the team on the pitch without resorting to the video assistant.
The ball may have hit Keane nearby, but as was the case with Saliba, the arm was completely away from the body. This is an obvious offense from Keane and will still be penalized with a penalty.
Possible penalty: McTominay handball
What happened: Sheffield United were awarded a penalty in the 31st minute when Scott McTominay was adjudged to have handled a James McAtee cross. The VAR, John Brooks, verified that referee Michael Oliver’s decision was correct.
VAR decision: Penalties are scored by Oliver McBurnie.
VAR Review: While McTominay’s arm was close to his body, there was clear movement towards the ball. This makes it a deliberate act and a sanction.
If the ball had hit McTominay’s arm as he attempted to pull it back into his body, it would not have been an accurate kick.
Possible offside reversal: Ajer on Maupay’s goal
What happened: Brentford thought they had taken the lead in the seventh minute. Bryan Mbeumo took the free kick, he was helped across the box by Nathan Collins and headed in by Neal Maupay. However, the flag was immediately raised for offside.
VAR decision: Without any goal.
VAR Review: Much of the confusion surrounding this decision came from a mistake with the big screen inside the stadium. This showed that the offside decision was against Collins, but it was actually Kristoffer Ajer who was flagged.
When Mbeumo plays the ball, Ajer holds back Burnley’s Lyle Foster and the assistant judged that this prevented an opponent from contesting the ball from an offside position. It’s unlikely VAR would have gotten involved in disallowing the goal for this, but it’s also subjectively an acceptable decision.
The assistant does not need to think that Foster will recover the ball or even decide to make a challenge, he only judges that the player in the offside position has affected his ability to do so.
Parts of this article include information provided by the Premier League and PGMOL.
