The video assistant referee (VAR) sparks debate every week in the Premier League, but how are these decisions made, and are they accurate?
This season, we are analyzing significant incidents to clarify the decision-making process in relation to VAR protocols and the laws of the game.
All screenshots photo credit: CBS
Andy Davies (@andydaviesref), a former Select Group referee with over 12 seasons of experience in the Premier League and Championship, offers a unique perspective on the VAR processes, rationale, and protocols in place on match days.
Inter Milan 0-1 Liverpool
Referee: Felix Zwayer
VAR: Sören Storks
Incident 1: Potential Handball leading to a goal.
Time: 32 minutes
What occurred: Liverpool’s Dominik Szoboszlai delivered a corner into the Inter Milan penalty area, where both Hugo Ekitike and Virgil van Dijk contested the ball. Van Dijk made the first contact, heading it toward goal after a deflection off Ekitike’s arm, allowing Ibrahima Konaté to score.
VAR decision: The VAR suggested an on-field review (OFR), ruling that Ekitike committed a handball offense in the build-up to the goal.
VAR review: This review took a lengthy four minutes, as officials were uneasy about a goal being scored due to a deflection off an attacking player’s arm. Ekitike’s contact was accidental, but his arm was positioned at shoulder height, outstretched. The officials debated whether this position was unnatural—essential to deeming it an offense under the law.
After the OFR, referee Zwayer concluded that the incident met the threshold for a handball and disallowed the goal.
Verdict: I feel Liverpool was unfortunate in this instance, as this goal would have stood in the Premier League, where the threshold for handball involving a teammate’s arm is notably higher. The handball law and its interpretation are applied with a stricter threshold in England compared to Europe, as seen in this incident. It will be intriguing to hear UEFA’s official stance on this interpretation.
Incident 2: Potential Penalty Kick
Time: 84 minutes
What occurred: Liverpool’s Florian Wirtz fell in the penalty area after minor contact from Inter defender Alessandro Bastoni tugging on his shirt.
VAR decision: The VAR determined that Bastoni’s action constituted a holding offense affecting Wirtz and recommended an OFR for a potential penalty kick.
VAR review: Referee Zwayer’s review at the monitor was relatively brief. After observing the incident from two angles, he concurred with the VAR and awarded a penalty kick.
Verdict: In my view, this was a poor use of VAR and an unexpected final decision from the referee. In Europe, the threshold for physical contact is lower than in England. However, for a holding offense to warrant a penalty, it must satisfy two criteria:
- Was the holding sustained?
- Was the holding impactful?
The contact on Wirtz in this case was minimal, brief, and did not impede the player’s ability to move—he was stationary when he chose to go down.
Similar to the handball decision earlier in the match, it will be telling to see UEFA’s official interpretation regarding this situation. I would be surprised if they uphold the VAR’s intervention or the referee’s decision.