Howard Webb, chief of PGMOL, has defended the use of Video Assistant Referee (VAR) technology that led to the overturning of Arsenal’s penalty during their recent match against Newcastle. The incident occurred in the first half, when Newcastle’s goalkeeper, Nick Pope, challenged Arsenal forward Viktor Gyokeres. Referee Jarred Gillett initially awarded a penalty but was prompted by VAR official Darren England to review the decision on-field due to the nature of the challenge.
Key Incident Details
During the challenge, Pope rushed towards Gyokeres, resulting in an apparent foul. However, after a thorough review lasting approximately three minutes, Gillett reversed his decision. Webb provided insights into the decision-making process that led to this conclusion.
VAR Review Process
Webb explained that VAR’s intervention was justified as it was clear that Pope had touched the ball before any contact with Gyokeres occurred. He emphasized that the referee did not initially recognize this crucial detail.
- Nick Pope’s challenge was deemed “not reckless.”
- Contact with Gyokeres happened after the ball was played.
- The VAR made the referee aware of a “clear and obvious error.”
Comparison with Other VAR Decisions
Webb also compared this decision to a previous incident involving Chelsea’s Robert Sanchez. In that instance, Sanchez was sent off for a challenge on Bryan Mbeumo, which was deemed a foul due to the nature of the play.
- Sanchez’s challenge involved a raised leg and was considered reckless.
- He obstructed a clear goalscoring opportunity.
In contrast, Pope’s actions displayed a different intent, affecting the ball’s trajectory and resulting in normal play resuming after the contact. Webb asserted that each situation must be judged individually, contrasting the two challenges based on the intent and outcome of the players’ actions.
Reactions
Despite the explanation, Arsenal players, including Bukayo Saka and manager Mikel Arteta, expressed disappointment with the VAR decision. They questioned the clarity behind the reversal, highlighting ongoing debates about the effectiveness of the VAR system.
In conclusion, Howard Webb’s statements reiterate the principles of VAR’s intended use: to correct clear errors and ensure accurate officiating in critical moments of the game. This incident reflects ongoing discussions regarding the evolving role of technology in sports officiating.
