[ad_1]
The video assistant referee has caused controversy each week. Premier LeagueBut how do decisions get made and are they right?
We examine the most important incidents after each weekend, both from the perspective of the VAR Protocol and the Laws of the Game.
– The impact of VAR on all Premiership clubs in 2023-24
– The Ultimate Guide to VAR in Premier League
This week, VAR Review is: You can find out more about this by clicking here. Manchester United A penalty was awarded and the team avoided conceding another. AFC BournemouthAll the important incidents in the matches.
Potential penalty overturn for foul by Kambwala against Christie
What has happened? Ryan Christie Man United’s defender was the one who brought him down Willy Kambwala Five minutes after the second half stoppage, the VAR pointed to the penalty spot. The VAR was used by the referee Tony Harrington to point at the spot of the penalty., Jarred Gillett checks the foul and its location.
VAR decision: The penalty is now a kick at the goal just outside of the field.
VAR Review Andoni IRAOLA, Bournemouth’s manager after the match said “I completely believe it was penalty”. “Against Newcastle, we were given a penalty because the contact began outside the box.
“But [today] The first frame was placed so that the initial contact is on the outer edge of the box. But the contact continues 1, 2, or 3 metres inwards and stops the player.”
It is a confusing law that only covers holding and not tackling or blocking. Iraola’s example from the game they played against Newcastle United You may also be interested in Adam Smith holding onto the shirt of Fabian Schär.
Harrington issued the penalty for Kambwala’s trip. The replays showed that the contact occurred outside of the box. Even if there had been a block afterward, even if Harrington gave the penalty, this contact was made outside of the area.
Iraola also said, “The VAR interjects into something that is clear and evident.”
The VAR will use factual evidence to determine if the travel was within the designated area. This is not covered by the “clear-and-obvious” rule, which requires the referee to go to the monitor in order to make a change to a subjective ruling.
In close situations like this, it’s fair to say that the referee could make the final decision. However, the VAR will provide exactly the same evidence.
Possible overturn of penalty: Handball on Smith
What has happened? Man United won a penalty kick in the second half after an attempt by Kobbie Mainoo Christie stopped the ball and the ball bounced onto Adam Smith, a Bournemouth defensive player. Harrington correctly pointed out the spot. Should it be overturned?
VAR decision: Score by the penalty Bruno Fernandes.
VAR Review This is a harsh call, but the VAR will still not overturn the official’s decision. This is a typical VAR situation where fans may feel that there was injustice. However, protocol dictates the decision of the referee.
Harrington’s claim that Smith moved his arm to the ball is not enough for VAR. Smith made a small but definite movement with his arm even if this was an instinctive response. Marcus Rashford The player must be behind him. This is the only exception, even if his arm is close to his body.
Handball is a more liberally enforced law in the Premier League compared to the continental leagues. However, due to subjectivity, inconsistent decisions are more common.
This season, three handball penalties were recorded as errors by VAR — including two in the Luton-Vs. Sheffield UnitedOne not against Arsenal‘s Martin Ødegaard You can also check out our other articles. Liverpool.
Andrew Robertson smacked the ball in Nathaniel Clyne’s face during Liverpool’s home defeat by Crystal Palace. The ball was likely to have been hit by the chest of the defender, but his arms were in. This would not have been a penality if there had not been an intentional movement.
Kambwala could have fouled Solanke before Fernandes scored
What has happened? Bruno Fernandes was able to equalise in the third minute, after Kambwala had attempted to challenge. Dominic SolankeMan United scored after the defender fell to the ground.
VAR decision: Goal stands.
VAR Review Kambwala did indeed foul the Bournemouth forward, but this was well before Fernandes’ goal.
Man United completed seven passes while Bournemouth made two attempts at interceptions.
Possible penalty: Estupiñán challenge on Odobert
What has happened? Wilson Odobert The seventh-minute break into the penalty area was met with a challenge by Pervis Estupiñán. Odobert’s protest wasn’t heard by the referee Simon Hooper. Robert Jones, the VAR (Click here to watch).
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR Review Burnley This could be another VAR decision that has gone against the grain of the “clear” and “obvious.”
Estupiñán’s challenge is clumsy but is it is largely shoulder to shoulder with the ball within playing distance? It’s likely enough to convince the VAR that this should be a decision made on-field. The decision of the Independent Key Match Incidents Panel in Premier League ruled that Ollie’s penalty claim was correct against Fulham this season.
There’s no doubt that this stays as a penalty if given by Hooper, and Estupiñán is fortunate to get away with it as he places his left leg across the Burnley forward.
Perhaps Estupiñán got the slightest touch on the ball with his left foot, though that isn’t clear and that wouldn’t rule out a possible penalty with such a challenge.
Collins challenges McBurnie.
What has happened? Brentford In the 68th Minute, they doubled their advantage. Mikkel Damsgaard Scored following the corner route. However, Oliver McBurnie Appealed for an offense by Nathan Collins David Coote checked the ball when it came over by the VAR.
VAR decision: Goal disallowed.
VAR Review The intervention may seem harsh at first glance, but replays reveal that Collins did place his left right in front McBurnie who was trying to shut down Damsgaard, leaving the Brentford player a shot.
Collins could have gotten away with the usual blocking actions we see on corners from attacking players. But it will raise the question as to when VARs should get involved.
Gibbs White on Semedo: Possible foul
What has happened? Morgan Gibbs White Egalise your for Nottingham Forest In first-half extra time, a header was scored following a corner by Giovanni Reyna. Was there any push from the scorer in the buildup?
VAR decision: Goal stands.
VAR Review Gibbs White was wearing at least one hand on his back. Nélson Semedo The corner delivery does not seem sufficient to warrant a VAR. The contact between an attacker and defender was much more intense, but the decision stayed on-field.
Possible red card: Pereira challenge on Paquetá
What has happened? Andreas Pereira Sliding in for the challenge Lucas Paquetá In the 61st minutes and caught West Ham United A player who has raised his foot. Stuart Attwell decided to issue a yellow card for the Fulham midfielder.
VAR decision: No Red Card
VAR Review Pereira’s fortunate as Attwell was able to show a yellow card due to the severity of the challenge.
However, the lack of force in the contact on Paquetá means a yellow card is always likely to be seen as an acceptable on-field decision by the VAR, Darren England — The first time he has been in the centre since his error Allowing it Luis DíazGoal for Liverpool You can also check out our other articles. Tottenham Hotspur Over six months ago,
Possible penalty: Paquetá challenge on Lukic
What has happened? Paquetá was booked in the fifth minute of added time for a rash and late challenge on Sasa Lukic. The VAR looked for possible red cards.
VAR decision: No Red Card
VAR Review Some similarities can be found in dismissal. Aston Villa‘s John McGinn McGinn took out Tottenham even though he ran from a distance. Destiny Udogie It’s not the power that creates, but the energy behind it.
Paquetá had no interest in the ball and kicked an opponent to the floor; a yellow card is supportable but another referee might have produced a red.
Possible offside: Guimarães on Schär goal
What has happened? Fabian Schär In the 87th, he sealed the win for Newcastle by heading home a cross from Anthony Gordon. Did a teammate stand offside before the goalkeeper? Stuart Attwell from the VAR checked on this goal. (Click here to watch)
VAR decision: Goal stands.
VAR Review Wolves’ Goal disallowed The following are some examples of the use of West Ham United The Independent Panel’s report last week led to a great deal of controversy. The decision was unanimously adopted.
Schär’s goal provides a great example of how an attacking player’s proximity to a goalkeeper is crucial.
Bruno Guimarães The player was not in a position that would have allowed him to see the ball. Tottenham Hotspur‘s Guglielmo Vicario It’s not the actual impact that determines whether there is an offense, but rather how it’s perceived.
The key difference is the distance between Guimarães and the keeper — the greater it is the less chance there is that the opponent can be affected.
Wolves’ Tawanda Chirewa It was almost as if the whole thing stood on its head Lukasz FabianskiThis is a simple decision. There’s far more subjectivity involved in Guimarães’ position.
It’s not hard to find situations that are similar but have opposite results. This is a constant source of frustration for fans.
Liverpool Had a Harvey Elliott The goal was disallowed. Burnley in December due to Mohamed Salah The offside rule in the face of the goalkeeper James Trafford. Salah’s position isn’t much different to Guimarães, yet it was a low shot which mean a greater chance of impact.
The month of September is a Dominik Szoboszlai Goal against Aston Villa Salah again was seen by the goalkeeper, but was still allowed to remain in play. Emiliano Martínez. In that case, it was said that because the gunshot was so far away that the victim had enough time to respond.
It’s impossible to assess impact consistently unless there is an offside given against players in the line of sight of a goalkeeper.
Carlos could be penalized for a challenge made by Jesus
What has happened? Gabriel Jesus In the 48th minute, the opponent challenged the ball and made the player go to the ground. Diego Carlos. The striker turned to David Coote, who asked for a spot-kick. But the referee continued.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR Review Jesus and Carlos both arrive around the same moment at the ball, without any obvious challenges. Jesus’ left foot was what appeared to be the one that went into the goal. Aston Villa defender.
Onyedinma Challenge on Doku: Possible overturn of penalty
What has happened? Jérémy Doku In the 75th minute of play, he ran to the penalty box and fell after a challenge by Fred Onyedinma. John Brooks pointed immediately to the location.
VAR decision: Score by the penalty Erling Haaland.
VAR Review Onyedinma put his right foot in the way of Doku when he was trying to get past.
This article contains information from the Premier League, PGMOL and other sources.
[ad_2]
