Thread by @DaleJohnsonESPN

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.