A pretty quiet weekend on the VAR front, but here's your Monday thread.
Looking at:
- Overturned Man City penalty + possible Silva pen
- Watford's penalty + retake scenario
- Joachim Andersen possible red card
- Harry Kane handball?
There's no doubt it was the correct decision to overturn Man City's first-half penalty against Everton.
From the replay first angles, it looks like there was knee-on-knee contact between Michael Keane and Raheem Sterling. But there was none.
This incident shows perfectly why a time limit on VAR reviews is NOT a good thing.
Finding the crucial camera angle isn't always a instant thing.
First replays suggested it wasn't a clear and obvious error - until the VAR, Chris Kavanagh, checked the camera behind the goal.
Obviously, we want VAR to be as quick as possible, but also get the best decisions.
If this camera angle had been shown by Sky AFTER an arbitrary VAR time limit had elapsed, and the penalty stood, what would have been the reaction?
Yep, the usual "what's the point of VAR".
Keane's later challenge on Bernardo Silva is a classic case of this season's interpretation.
Last season (think Welbeck v Liverpool) it's probably a penalty.
Now a ref should "ask if the contact has a consequence, and has the player used that contact to try and a penalty."
Referees should "consider consequence and the motivation of the player as well".
Keane certainly catches Silva on the foot, but there minimal contact.
Silva then goes forward a step before going to the ground. No penalty is the correct decision.
Now Watford's penalty vs Man United. First, the retake procedure.
There's no doubt that Kiko Femenia (21) was encroaching in the box when the penalty was struck, before scoring the rebound.
But why do Watford get to retake it?
If a penalty is missed, and encroachment is by the attacking player only, the goal is disallowed and play restarts with an indirect free-kick to Man United.
But if there are players from both teams inside, no matter if they are involved in the play, then it's a retake.
While you can't see Aaron Wan-Bissaka's foot inside is the area, that doesn't matter anyway.
Bruno Fernandes is one of a few players with his foot on the line. The line belongs to the box. So he is inside.
Therefore, it has to be a retake.
(NB: leaning in doesn't count)
In a situation like this, it seems incredibly harsh on the defending team.
The defenders have had no impact on the kick, yet they are essentially penalised for Femenia scoring the rebound.
If Femenia had missed the rebound, the VAR wouldn't have ordered a retake.
The VAR cannot allow a goal to stand when scored by an encroaching attacking player.
But if the rebound has been missed by an encroaching attacking player, the VAR wouldn't intervene as the offence it isn't an impacted penalty incident.
Agree this might sound contradictory.
On the penalty decision, Scott McTominay could easily have been sent off for not making a genuine attempt for the ball (still a red).
The VAR, David Coote, must have judged that the scoring chance / control of the ball wasn't certain for Josh King.
Ref gives red, it stands.
While there is a degree of doubt for the McTominay red, the decision not to send off Joachim Andersen for his challenge on Chris Wood has to be an error.
Ref Simon Hooper was way behind play and didn't even give a foul. If a foul is given it's a certain red, Wood is in.
The only explanation is that the VAR, Graham Scott, didn't feel there was enough contact for it to be a clear and obvious error not to give the foul.
Admittedly, there actually isn't a huge amount of contact, but Andersen has both arms on Wood, and it seems a simple red card.
Now the claim for a handball penalty against Harry Kane.
Kane has his arm close to his body and the ball is hit at him from close range. It's in the expected position for a player's action.
If his arm had been out away from his body, this would have been a penalty.
Finally, a note on Tottenham's first goal.
There was a check for offside, but Lucas Moura was behind the ball even if it hit Harry Kane and not Kalvin Phillips.
Also, if the ball hit Kane's arm, accidental handball by a teammate before a goal is no longer an offence.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
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.
So the dust has settled on the first VAR audio show of the year with Howard Webb.
Time for a little old-school VAR thread to go through it.
I'll include the video clips.
We got 2 of the 3 big errors in the Premier League this season - the penalty not given against Andre Onana vs. Wolves + the offside goal Man City scored against Fulham.
It didn't include Alexis Mac Allister's red card, which has been the main point of complaint in my comments.
It would have been better to include that Mac Allister red, especially as it was overturned on appeal.
But then if you include Mac Allister, you drop something else (Zaroury?). And you absolutely have to include the examples of good process to show where VAR works.