Thread by @DaleJohnsonESPN

It's your (Bank Holiday) Monday VAR thread, lots to cover today, including:

- Reece James red card / penalty
- Man United's winner / Man City's second
- Xhaka red
- Penalty to Norwich / Southampton
- Disallowed Norwich / Brentford goals

Let's start with the Reece James red card for handball on the goal-line.

For all the controversy this has caused, there's no other decision than a penalty and a red card.

James clearly moves his hand into the path of the ball and prevents a goal.

Law 12 is very clear on this.

"Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence, the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs."

A goal was denied. James couldn't be booked. He has to be sent off.

There is NO LONGER a clause in the Laws about the ball deflecting of a player's own body and hitting the arm. It has been removed from the Laws for 2021-22.

Handball is now purely about:
a) Intent, or
b) Making the body bigger in a way that doesn't match the player's action

Why was the clause removed? Well, it was pointless.

Under last season's law:
With a deflection, handball given if deliberate, or in an unnatural, extended position.

Without a deflection, handball given if deliberate, or in an unnatural, extended position.

They are the same!

Obviously the red will seem harsh to many, but there was no other option for the referee.

The triple jeopardy rule, whereby you only get booked if you give a penalty away, doesn't apply to a handball offence.

Only applies to tackles when an attempt is made to play the ball.

The only issue was the poor use of the monitor. It is there to "sell" the decision to players and supporters, but this didn't happen.

It certainly wouldn't have changed the decision, it was a definite red card and penalty. But Anthony Taylor should have viewed in full.

The ref and the VAR are in constant contact, and if Anthony Taylor said "I saw the arm movement so if it hit the arm it's a penalty and red card" then he may feel he only has to see the contact point.

But if the ref isn't seen to be making the decision, it raises doubts.

Onto the most contentious decision of the weekend - the foul by Paul Pogba in the build-up to Man United's winner at Wolves.

Is it a foul? Yes.

Was it a clear and obvious error by the ref not to give the foul? An interesting question of VAR protocol.

On any review, the VAR asks the referee to talk them through the incident.

Mike Dean told the VAR he saw the contact by Pogba but didn't feel it warranted a foul.

If a referee has a clear view and describes the incident correctly, VAR protocol makes it difficult to intervene.

Sometimes a referee can be too close to an incident, and there's no doubt that a different angle was more telling.

Should the VAR have taken the different angle into account? Or does Mike Dean's description of the challenge carry more weight?

Compare it to the Man City goal disallowed last week, when ref Graham Scott didn't see the contact by Bernardo Silva on Milot Rashica. That allowed a VAR review.

The issue here is the Pogba challenge is worse, but doesn't get a pitchside review because the ref had a full view.

It was an odd situation, compounded by the way Neves went to ground very late. That must have influenced Mike Dean's decision.

A good case study for PGMOL on where the light touch should be.

Also, a great example of a decision where hearing the VAR conversation would be good.

Of course, Arsenal fans were quick to compare to Pogba's challenge to the Granit Xhaka red card. But there are key differences:

- Xhaka dives in with both feet off the floor
- Goes in with a jumping action
- Out of control (off the ground)

A red card for endangering the safety of an opponent doesn't require contact - the very nature of the tackle can lead to a red card, even if the ball is won.

While Pogba caught Neves, there wasn't the same force and intensity, so it was never likely to be reviewed for a red.

On Man City's second goal, the VAR may have been more interested had it been directly related to the goal (ie. Aymeric Laporte had become involved in the play).

If Martin Atkinson has seen the tussle (he had a clear view) it's unlikely be seen as a clear and obvious error.

But we will continue to get similar incidents with different outcomes based on the subjectivity of each referee and what the decision is on the field of play.

Also, two incidents are rarely actually the same, and each must be judged on its own merits.

Speaking of which...

The second of the three VAR reviews this weekend saw Norwich get a penalty for a foul on Pierre Lees-Melou by Caglar Soyuncu.

I don't think this fits with the pledge to reduce soft penalties where contact is initiated.

2 min 32 secs

People will draw obvious comparisons to the penalty Dele Alli won last weekend for Spurs at Wolves.

In both examples, the defender/goalkeeper made rash attempts to make a challenge, while the attacker made a movement toward his opponent.

Alli's penalty was given by the ref, and he would probably have been caught regardless of his movement.

With Lees-Melou, he seems to move his foot into the defender.

If the ref give it, ok. But don't agree the VAR should judge this as a clear and obvious error.

On Norwich's disallowed goal, these are the key points:

Matters:
- Cantwell was in an offside position
- In the goalkeeper's line of vision

Doesn't matter:
- The keeper is taller or peering around the attacker (!)
- The keeper had no chance of making the save

The third overturn saw Southampton given a late penalty at Newcastle.

It was a definite penalty for the tackle by Jamaal Lascelles on Adam Armstrong.

No DOGSO as he made a genuine attempt for the ball. In general, this is the case for any tackle even if nowhere near the ball.

There was a great example in the change to reduce soft penalties in Aston Villa v Brentford.

Last season, Kortney Hause's tap on the shin of Yoane Wissa would have been given. This season, the reaction of Wissa did not match the contact.

"Not all contact is a foul."

Finally on Brentford's disallowed goal at Aston Villa.

The goalkeeper's action is only complete when he has kicked the ball, so you cannot "steal" the ball in mid-air. Correctly disallowed by referee Peter Bankes.

I'm aware there's probably a few other incidents that could have been included this week, but I simply can't do all of them every week.

Have to be selective on these in general.