- Fabian Balbuena red card
- Callum Wilson handball (and reference to Luke Shaw)
- Arsenal penalty
- The little-known subjective element of offside
As usual, don't shoot the messenger.
Let's start with Fabian Balbuena, it's just a really VAR intervention.
Referee Chris Kavanagh isn't blameless of course, but as I said with the Tomas Soucek red card vs. Fulham it's the VAR, Peter Bankes, who is the gatekeeper.
I've talked several times about referees lacking confidence as VARs, almost second guessing against their own vast experience and judgement.
This seemed the case here, with the VAR watching the incident so many times he convinced himself something was there that wasn't.
Remember, the monitor is primarily for the referee to confirm he's made a clear and obvious error.
While he is still able to disagree with the VAR (it's happened 5 times this season), the process makes it unlikely.
So Chris Kavanagh will go the the screen in this mindset.
Chris Kavanagh, however, is one of the 5 referees to reject a pitchside review - after he had given Everton a penalty at Liverpool.
That is the only time a referee has rejected an overturn of a decision given (for the other 4, play on was the original call).
In reality, 115 times out of 120 in fact, the VAR is in control of reviews. It's his subjectivity which ultimately decides if an overturn happens.
And that's why it's absolutely crucial referees improve as VARs and use the instinct that their experience as referees gives them.
By starting VAR late, and ignoring learnings of other leagues, Prem refs are 3 seasons behind in operating VAR with pitchside monitors.
It's shown more and more as the season has progressed. We should gone through this process last season, but we were put another year behind.
This is just my opinion, but I suspect Peter Bankes' judgement was clouded by the recent red cards for Liam Cooper and John Stones - which have some similarities but are different in terms of the intensity and the players' level of control.
He was afraid of being inconsistent.
While intent is no longer in the laws, that doesn't mean all contact is a red card.
Balbuena's coming together with Ben Chilwell was nothing more than that.
And then we had another very similar incident later in the half... What was that about consistency?
This should never gone to review, but once it has it's very difficult for Chris Kavanagh not to give the red on the evidence offered by the VAR, Peter Bankes.
Again, it comes back to the VAR being effective in their job as the gatekeeper in identifying clear and obvious errors.
It reminded me of Dani Ceballos' challenge on Yerry Mina in December (no action by the VAR), which in many ways is worse because the Arsenal player is aware of where his opponent is.
Neither should be red cards.
But check out this amazing VAR red card in Brazil, in the semifinals of the Copa Do Nordeste between Copa do Ceara and Vitoria.
VAR is only ever going to be as effective as those who operate it.
Couple of tweets on Callum Wilson's disallowed goal. Contrary to some reports, this goal will still be ruled out next season.
A striker still cannot accidentally play the ball with his arm and then score, despite the law tweak. However, if an own goal followed it WOULD count.
The VAR checked the push by Trent Alexander-Arnold but didn't feel it was a penalty.
In a season of soft penalties I think that was the right call, but understand why Newcastle fans would think otherwise.
Talking of which.....
Onto the Arsenal penalty against Everton (cancelled for offside), which encapsulates why so many people are perplexed with VAR.
We would never previously expect this to be given, but this season if the ref gives a pen for any contact it stands.
Of course, this isn't the only example of a soft penalty over the weekend.
There were two in the Villa vs. West Brom game, the worst being when Ainsley Maitland-Niles went down after Ezri Konsa brushed the top of his boot.
Thing is, the VAR would never, bar rare examples (Welbeck), give these penalties. But the system also means the VAR will not rescind them as a clear and obvious error.
There's now been 108 pens this season, and the all-time Prem record is 112. But this is a Europe-wise issue.
Penalties have always been more prevalent in the Latin leagues (Italy, Spain) but there has been a shift in England, France and Germany. Something has changed.
- Up 100% season on season in France
- Up 50% in Germany
- Up 37.5% in England
- Up 29% in UCL (to remarkable rate)
The heads of referees across the major leagues meet each summer, and regularly throughout the season, to discuss how the game is managed.
You have to feel there has been a collective decision to be stricter on contact in the penalty area.
So now a mention of the offside aspect of the cancelled Arsenal penalty.
David Coote has disallowed three goals and a penalty for offside as the VAR, and three of those decisions have been among the most marginal possible.
It's a little known fact that VAR offside has initial subjective elements:
- Phase
- No lines (use naked eye)
- Single pitch line
- Full tech with all lines
Obviously, some VARs (just as refs) are more pedantic than others.
So why is this important?
On Attacking Phase, very few VARs would have given the Arsenal offside.
There was just under 14 seconds between the pass and the goal - the longest time for a VAR intervention this season.
David Coote could easily have let this go and no one would have had a clue it happened.
The same goes for applying the offside lines.
Another VAR would look at the image (without the lines) and decide it's not necessary to draw them. It's too close, stay with the field decision.
And that needs to happen more often, regardless of any tweaks for next season.
This is an example where the VAR (Simon Hooper) decided the offside for Issa Diop didn't need full tech calibration. He could have chosen to use it.
Hooper has only disallowed one goal for offside, and that was for Marcus Rashford being ahead of the ball. Not one using lines.
Finally, a quick switch to back to handball. Remember, defensive handball is different to attacking handball.
So while Wilson's is an automatic offence, Luke Shaw would need to have his arm in an unnatural position. This has consistently not been given as a handball penalty.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Had clarification of World Cup draw conditions. We know a few more things.
- England 75% chance of group of 5
- Wales definitely group of 5
- Northern Ireland 85.71% chance of group of 5
- Rep of Ireland & Scotland definitely group of 4
Thread to explain, and here are the pots.
The specific conditions over the 4 and 5 team groups depended on the number of teams in each pot who needed a QF/playoff.
As the number is lower than 6 in pots 2 and 3, it can now be confirmed playoff teams in Pots 2 and 3 (Scotland, ROI) will definitely be in a group of 4.
There are 10 teams in Pot 1 who need a QF/playoff but only 6 groups of four.
The 4 "QF winners" automatically get a group of 4.
That leaves two groups of 4, and six groups of 5 randomly filled with "QF losers", Austria, Belgium, England, Switzerland.
Why don't leagues have a chip in the ball for semi-automated VAR offside?
🖥️ Tech by Kinexon
⚽️ Centre-mounted chip in ball developed & patented by Adidas
❌ No league uses Adidas
Adidas would need to share/licence, or other ball companies find an alternative to house chip.
Who are the ball manufacturers for the different leagues?
Premier League (Nike this season, Puma from 2025-26)
LaLiga (Puma)
Bundesliga (Derbystar)
Serie A (Puma)
Ligue 1 (Kipsta)
Kinexon has worked with Adidas, Derbystar and Puma so far.
It's not easy to overcome, as Kinexon went through 1000s of prototypes until it achieved a ball that was actually FIFA-approved, in weight and the counterweight and the balance, and that provided good results.
So it's not as simple as saying "put a chip in the ball".
🔷 How many places in Champions League for Serie A
🔷 What happens to place in UCL for the UEL titleholders
🔷 What happens to seeding for the 2024-25 UCL, 👀 Barcelona
Pull up a chair a moment.
1. How many places will Serie A get in the Champions League?
We know Italy will have 5 teams in the UCL next season as they have one of the 2 extra places for league performance.
Atalanta are 5th. If they finish 5th, and 5th only, Italy will have 6 teams in the UCL.
AS Roma are guaranteed to finish in 6th, so they are left waiting on Atalanta's final position.
If Atalanta finish 5th, AS Roma will be in the UCL.
If Atalanta finish 3rd or 4th, AS Roma will be in the UEL.
Atalanta sit two points outside the top 4 with a game in hand.
Sick of keepers holding the ball for 30-40 seconds to waste time or slow down play?
The [unenforced] law says a keeper can only hold the ball for 6 seconds. Any longer and it's an indirect FK to the opposition.
We now have details of The IFAB trial to change it.
Thread. 👇
As well as wasting time, a goalkeeper holding the ball for too long is considered an unfair tactic because the opposing team has no possibility to regain possession.
That's because a goalkeeper cannot be challenged when in control of the ball with the hand(s).
A keeper holding the ball for more than 6 seconds should be punishable by an indirect free kick.
However, we have got to the stage where this is rarely enforced by referees, which in recent years has been exploited tactically.
Mauro Icardi's offside in Galatasaray vs. Manchester United gives us a good illustration of how semi-automated technology will be more accurate and reliable - yet may lead to more goals being disallowed.
This was ruled out on the field, but stay with me.
There's a common misconception that handball starts at the bottom of the sleeve.
This isn't the case.
It's the arm point level with the armpit - if you had it by your side - around the whole arm.
Basically, the area of the arm which can't increase body size if you move it.
The starting point for offside (and handball) is therefore an imaginary line on the arm.
With the old tech, the point on the attacker and defender is plotted manually by the VAR and operator.
This obviously has to cause inconsistencies, and it's why there's a tolerance level.
This is what happened with the Luis Diaz "goal" which Liverpool had disallowed vs. Tottenham.
There will be a deeper dive in the Monday VAR thread, but in simple terms the VAR took the wrong onfield decision - it led to the goal being disallowed.
So the VAR, Darren England, checked offside thinking the onfield decision was "goal."
It was a quick offside check because it was clear Diaz was onside, so he told the referee "check complete".
In telling the ref "check complete" he is saying the onfield decision was correct.
So the "human error" by the VAR team is getting the onfield decision wrong. Not by failing to draw lines etc.
The lines were drawn and Diaz was clearly onside.
The huge, quite unbelievable error was misunderstanding the onfield decision.