Thread by @DaleJohnsonESPN

It's Monday VAR thread time! Including:

- That Tomas Soucek red card
- Possible Ezri Konsa / John Stones red card
- Possible Arsenal penalty
- Disallowed Burnley goal

It's a long one this week.... Remember, don't shoot the messenger.

First, the Soucek red card. Let's look at how this happened, and the thought process of the VAR, Lee Mason.

While ref Mike Dean has to take responsibility, it's Mason who must shoulder most of the blame.

Mason instigates the review, it cannot happen without his intervention.

A reminder of the wording of the law here on violent conduct.

"A player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible."

Was Soucek's action:

Deliberate? ❌
Force used negligible? ✅

He was simply lifting his arm over Aleksandar Mitrovic (you can draw your own conclusions about the striker's part in the farce).

So how did Mason come to the conclusion it was deliberate?

Mason told Dean to look at the clenched fist of Soucek. And it's not the first time.

When Emiliano Buendia of Norwich was sent off vs. Burnley in July, Mason was VAR.

He told the ref, Kevin Friend, that Buendia clenched his fist before striking Ashley Westwood with his elbow.

This is similar, as Soucek goes from open hand to closed. But Buendia clearly has malice.

Does Soucek *clench* his fist? I don't think so. He just closes his hand as he tries to lift his arm over his opponent.

Mason has got too forensic and tripped up himself, and Dean.

Worst thing is Mason manages to persuade Dean to make a bad decision, just a few days after Graham Scott did the same in Man United vs. Southampton (Bednarek red).

Mason has already had a pitchside review rejected (Martin Atkinson, Fulham v Liverpool). Shame this wasn't too.

This is about human decision-making. It's not a error of VAR as a concept.

Germany has also seen a week full of controversy with VAR, all over subjective incidents and the view of the ref or VAR.

Maybe the final answer is dedicated VARs who are actually good at being VARs.

People often talk about a lack of consistency. Bottom line is with subjective decisions, it will ultimately come down to the individual opinion of a VAR.

The only way you can get absolute consistency is if the same VAR does all 380 games, which is obviously impossible.

I'm very confident West Ham will win their appeal, and Soucek will be available to face Man United.

I've not heard anyone in a position of knowledge say they thought it should be a red (unlike David Luiz which was backed up), so the FA's independent panel will surely rescind.

On the possible red card for Ezri Konsa for Denying an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity (DOGSO), the following must be considered:

- distance to goal
- general direction of the play
- likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
- location and number of defenders

Konsa is without doubt saved here because the offence happens so far from goal.

That's not saying it cannot be a red card, but it's in the kind of area where the VAR would not consider a yellow to be a clear and obvious error. If the ref had sent off Konsa, it would stand.

Ruben Dias vs. Liverpool.

- Heavy touch by Mo Salah
- Ball runs away with John Stones covering
- Salah goes down from the Dias hold

You can't say, beyond any doubt, Salah has an obvious goal-scoring opportunity so a yellow can't be seen as wrong. Better seen on video.

How do these two differ from the David Luiz red card for DOGSO?

Willian Jose is literally about to shoot when the contact happens.

This is an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. There is no question of a covering defender, the run of the ball or the distance to goal.

We can roll the Salah incident into Arsenal's penalty claim against Villa.

Taking both in isolation, Martinez pulling Lacazette looks a clearer penalty.

So ref's decision carrying the weight will always be an issue with perceived injustice when comparing penalty decisions.

Reasoning seems to be that Lacazette also has hold of Martinez and impeded the goalkeeper. Six of one.

I wasn't surprised the penalty wasn't given because we rarely see the VAR (or indeed a ref) penalise a keeper (think Meslier, for example) in this kind of situation.

Peter Walton got some criticism for saying on BT Sport that "VAR is not there to get the correct decision".

He is sort of right, he just didn't put it very well.

He should have said "VAR isn't there to get every decision correct", hence the clear and obvious consideration.

VAR isn't there to get every decision correct, because so many decisions are subjective.

What is correct to an Arsenal fan will most likely be incorrect to an Aston Villa fan.

It's the same for most subjective calls across all games.

The decision to give Chelsea a penalty at Sheffield United was clearly correct. Aaron Ramsdale goes with the man, not the ball.

Yes, the ref should have given it, but some moan that VAR shouldn't be needed for howlers like this, having said VAR should only be used for howlers!

Adding the possible Jan Bednarek red card after requests.

With defenders in close proximity and the ball not under control, a yellow wouldn't be an incorrect decision.

Same as the others though, another ref on another day might show red as it's still subjective.

Finally, Burnley's goal disallowed for offside.

- Ashley Barnes plays the ball
- A block by Ben White does not reset offside
- Matej Vydra was off the pitch but remains actively offside
- Vydra takes the ball and is involved in the goal

Correct decision by the linesman.

Remember, Vydra needs to be ahead of TWO defenders, and the keeper is standing in front of his goal. So Vydra is clearly offside.

BUT if the keeper was on his line, Vydra would be onside.

If players are off the pitch, they are considered to be on the line for offside purposes.

So, imagine the goalkeeper is on his line in this example.

Image 1, Vydra is offside.
Image 2, Vydra is onside.

And finally! To clear up the disallowed Che Adams goal.

This is a subjective element to the offside law but while Emil Krafth (I think it is) deliberate plays the ball, Danny Ings is deemed to be in close proximity to him and thus offside does not reset.

And yes, I wrote John Stones red card in the very first tweet and it should say Ruben Dias....