Video Assistant Referee causes controversy every week in the Premier League, but how are decisions made, and are they correct?
After each weekend we take a look at the major incidents, to examine and explain the process both in terms of VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game
In this week's VAR Review: Should Diogo Jota's penalty for Liverpool against Newcastle United have been overturned? And is the VAR looking to support the on-field decision too much? Plus, all the incidents from the latest round of games.
Liverpool 4-2 Newcastle
Possible penalty overturn: Dúbravka challenge on Jota
What happened: Diogo Jota ran through on goal in the 84th minute, attempted to go past goalkeeper Martin Dúbravka and then went to ground. Referee Anthony Taylor pointed to the penalty spot, with the decision checked by the VAR, Stuart Attwell (watch here.)
VAR decision: Penalty stands, scored by Mohamed Salah.
 |
| Martin Dúbravka clips the right foot of Diogo Jota. NBC |
VAR review: Premier League referees work under an instruction that contact must have a consequence if a spot kick is to be awarded, while the attacker should go down in a way which fits that contact.
On first viewing, it looked like Jota had simulated without contact. Yet upon watching the replays, the goalkeeper did catch the Liverpool forward's left leg with his left arm. But does that mean this should remain a penalty with such a small amount of contact and a delayed fall?
Yet with the weight a referee's decision on the field carries, and the high threshold for a VAR intervention, penalties like this don't tend to get overturned. Any evidence of contact leads to the VAR supporting the on-field call. We saw it with spot kicks awarded against Wolves to Newcastle United and Sheffield United. In both those cases there was negligible contact, though the Premier League's Independent Key Match Incidents Panel said the VAR should have intervened in those cases.
The VAR requires such clear evidence of an error, few spot kicks actually get cancelled. Of the five overturned this season, only one has been for a foul (the other four were for handball.)
Was this really enough to make Jota go down as he did, dragging his right foot along the ground two steps later? If Taylor hadn't awarded a penalty it's unlikely the VAR would have sent the referee to the monitor.
Most fans would prefer VAR gets involved in situations like this to at least let the referee have another look, though that will require a change in the ethos of VAR and a lowering of the threshold. Right now a referee only goes to the monitor to confirm he has made a "clear and obvious" error rather than to check it.
 |
| Diogo Jota hasn't started going down even though he is already past Martin Dúbravka. Andrew Powell/Liverpool FC via Getty Images |
"Clear and obvious" has been a millstone around the neck of VAR since its inception, largely because it's so difficult to define and is the subjective view of another of the 20 referees who act as a VAR in the Premier League. It's just a second opinion.
But removing "clear and obvious" wouldn't be the magic wand many think it would be. It would lead to far more stoppages and wouldn't necessarily mean different outcomes. Indeed, after the penalty awarded to Sheffield United, Wolves boss Gary O'Neil said referee Robert Jones insisted his decision was correct after watching replays postmatch. Additional reviews to a lower threshold doesn't mean the referee will believe he's made a mistake.
Also lost in the "clear and obvious" discussion is that there will always be an aggrieved side in these 50-50 or 60-40 situations; just ask Arsenal fans after they had a spot kick overturned against Manchester United earlier this season. (Taylor was the referee for this game, too.) Taylor gave the spot kick because he believed Aaron Wan-Bissaka had tripped Kai Havertz when he placed his right foot -- but there was no contact with the Arsenal player at this point. Thus, Taylor hadn't described the contact correctly, and it opened the door for a review.
Or when Arsenal didn't get a penalty for a small amount of contact by Aston Villa's Douglas Luiz on Gabriel Jesus (a decision supported by the independent panel.) There was arguably more contact than there was for Jota, yet the penalty wasn't given on the field and it wasn't enough for a VAR overturn. But if the ref had given it, it would have stayed a penalty. Consistency of decisions isn't possible under this protocol, nor it is the intention.
Attwell was the referee for the debatable late penalty that gave Aston Villa victory at home to Burnley, covered later, so at least you could say he's been consistent on the pitch and in the VAR hub.
Possible penalty overturn: Botman challenge on Diaz
What happened: Luis Díaz moved in on goal in the 20th minute, stumbling to the ground after a tackle by Sven Botman. Referee Taylor had also pointed to the spot for this earlier incident (watch here.)
VAR decision: Penalty stands, Salah shot saved by Dúbravka.
 |
| Sven Botman catches Luis Diaz. NBC |
VAR review: While there might have been questions over the later penalty, there was no chance this would be overturned. There was clear contact by Botman's right leg onto Diaz's left, which caused him to lose his footing.
Diaz may have gone down easily, but this spot kick was far more supportable.
