VAR in the Premier League: Controversial Decisions and Refereeing Errors?

The VAR in the Premier League: Controversial Decisions and Detailed Analysis

Every weekend, the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) generates controversy in the Premier League. We analyze the key incidents, examining the decisions and their correct application according to the VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game.

Analysis of the Week’s Key Decisions

• Should Brentford’s goal against Chelsea in added time have been disallowed?
• Why was a Tottenham Hotspur goal against West Ham United disallowed?
• Should Wolverhampton Wanderers have played with 10 men against Newcastle United?

Brentford vs. Chelsea: Offside on the Equalizing Goal?

In the Brentford vs. Chelsea match, Brentford scored the equalizing goal in added time. Fábio Carvalho guided the ball into the net after a touch from Kristoffer Ajer. VAR, James Bell, reviewed a possible offside position of Dango Ouattara.VAR Decision: The goal is valid.VAR Review: Although you cannot be offside from a throw-in, Ajer’s touch created a new phase. Ouattara was slightly ahead of Chelsea defender Reece James. As Ouattara did not touch the ball, the decision was subjective.

Dango Ouattara in an offside position while Kristoffer Ajer participates in the play.The law states that a player cannot “clearly attempt to play a ball that is nearby, when this action impacts an opponent.” Ouattara extended his leg, but the impact on James was debatable. The team on the field considered that Ouattara did not affect the play, so the goal was awarded. The decision divided opinions, but VAR did not intervene. The review took 1 minute and 28 seconds, showing Bell evaluating Ouattara’s movement.

The ball went to Dango Ouattara before he made any move, so VAR considered that there was no clear impact for an offside infringement.

These types of decisions are subjective and may vary depending on the VAR referee in charge. VAR interventions to disallow goals due to an attacker’s impact on a defender are rare. The Premier League’s Key Match Incidents (KMI) panel recorded an error on one occasion last season.

In January 2022, an offside by Roberto Firmino, which did not impact the defender, resulted in a goal for Liverpool, showing how an offside player may not impact the play.

Roberto Firmino, in an offside position, jumped to head a cross that resulted in a goal for Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain.In general, it is considered acceptable to leave the decision to the referee on the field in situations like this.

West Ham United vs. Tottenham Hotspur: Was the Goal Disallowed Due to a Foul?

Tottenham Hotspur scored a goal from a corner, but the referee disallowed the play for a foul by Micky van de Ven on Kyle Walker-Peters. VAR, John Brooks, reviewed the play.VAR Decision: No goal.VAR Review: A soft foul was considered, but VAR upheld it. Van de Ven pushed Walker-Peters, causing him to stumble. However, the incident originated from a foul by Mateus Fernandes on Van de Ven, which destabilized Walker-Peters.

Micky van de Ven was penalized by referee Jarred Gillett for pushing Kyle Walker-Peters with both hands.Tottenham midfielder James Maddison criticized the decision on social media, arguing that soft fouls are called on corner kicks all the time. VAR has disallowed goals for fouls on few occasions.

Mateus Fernandes collided with Micky van de Ven, which was the real catalyst for Kyle Walker-Peters ending up on the ground.The decision to uphold the foul in this case is consistent with the current trend of VAR in the Premier League.

West Ham United vs. Tottenham Hotspur: Missed Penalty?

In another incident, a possible penalty wasn’t signaled for mutual holding between Fernandes and Van de Ven during a corner kick. The referee allowed the game to continue.VAR Decision: No penalty.VAR Review: Premier League referees must penalize clear holds, but the decision depends on interpretation. The referee considered that there was a mutual hold, and Van de Ven was the one who brought down the West Ham player. However, Fernandes was not playing the ball, which could indicate a non-football related action that would deserve a penalty. This type of situation often generates controversy among fans.

West Ham United vs. Tottenham Hotspur: Soucek Red Card

Tomás Soucek received a straight red card for a hard tackle on João Palhinha. VAR reviewed the play.

Tomás Soucek fouls João Palhinha high, earning him a red card.VAR Decision: Red card confirmed.VAR Review: It was a clear red card. Soucek went into the play with his foot high and studs first, impacting Palhinha’s shin. The straight leg is considered more dangerous, as there is no cushioning on impact. VAR backed the referee’s decision.

Newcastle United vs. Wolverhampton Wanderers: Should There Have Been a Red Card?

Harvey Barnes fell after a dispute with Yerson Mosquera. The referee did not call a foul and VAR reviewed a possible DOGSO (Denial of Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity).

Yerson Mosquera appeared to challenge Harvey Barnes by leading with an arm towards the head of the Newcastle United player.VAR Decision: No red card.VAR Review: VAR can only consider a red card for DOGSO outside the penalty area. VAR determined it was a tussle for the ball, but Mosquera appeared to hit Barnes with his arm. If it were considered a foul, a red card would have been justified.

Harvey Barnes would have taken control of the ball and had a clear opportunity to score a goal.

Burnley vs. Liverpool: Red Card for Ugochukwu?

Lesley Ugochukwu received a yellow card for a late tackle on Alexis Mac Allister. VAR reviewed the play for a possible red card.

Lesley Ugochukwu causes Alexis Mac Allister’s ankle to bend, but the point of contact being low and the short distance meant a yellow card was acceptable.VAR Decision: No red card.VAR Review: Several factors were considered. The contact was low and the distance short, which suggested less force. The action was more reckless than dangerous. A “orange” card was considered, between yellow and red, and the decision was not changed.

Burnley vs. Liverpool: Handball Penalty by Hannibal

Liverpool was awarded a penalty for a handball by Hannibal Mejbri. The referee pointed to the penalty spot and VAR reviewed the play.

Hannibal Mejbri raised his arm and blocked a cross from Jeremie Frimpong.VAR Decision: Penalty awarded, scored by Mohamed Salah.VAR Review: Hannibal deflected the ball with his arm, creating a clear barrier. It was a clear penalty. This season, five penalties have already been awarded for handball without VAR intervention.

Burnley vs. Liverpool: Should the Penalty Have Been Retaken?

Salah scored Liverpool’s winning goal from the penalty spot, but Frimpong was inside the area before the penalty was taken. Should it have been retaken?

Jeremie Frimpong was inside the area when the penalty was taken, but the law on encroachment has changed.VAR Decision: Goal stands.VAR Review: VAR intervenes if the invasion affects the outcome. The law was modified to align with the VAR protocol, so Frimpong’s invasion is no longer grounds for retaking the penalty.

Bournemouth vs. Brighton: Penalty for Foul on Evanilson

Evanilson fell in the area after a tackle by Jan Paul van Hecke. The referee signaled a penalty and VAR reviewed the play.

Jan Paul van Hecke of Brighton & Hove Albion concedes a penalty against Evanilson.VAR Decision: Penalty awarded, scored by Antoine Semenyo.VAR Review: There was minimal contact, but the initial decision stood. This incident shows similarities to other questionable penalty situations in the season.