VAR assessment: Arsenal benefited from a penalty decision to level the score.
The video assistant referee generates debate weekly in the Premier League and during many of our cherished Champions League evenings, but what is the decision-making process and is it accurate?
This season, we will analyze significant incidents to clarify and outline the procedure concerning both VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game.
Andy Davies (@andydaviesref) is a former Select Group referee with over 12 seasons on the elite list, officiating in the Premier League and Championship. With substantial experience at the top level, he has worked within the VAR framework in the Premier League and provides a distinct perspective on the processes, reasoning, and protocols implemented on a Premier League matchday.
Bayer Leverkusen 1-1 Arsenal
Referee: Halil Umut Meler
VAR: Rob Dieperink
Time: 86 minutes
Incident: Penalty awarded to Arsenal
What happened: Leverkusen’s Malik Tillman challenged Arsenal forward Noni Madueke in the penalty area. The Arsenal player fell to the ground, prompting the referee to award a penalty to Arsenal.
VAR decision: VAR reviewed and upheld the on-field penalty decision. The VAR, Dieperink, took his time analyzing the replays, ultimately concluding that the challenge met the criteria for a foul, considering the defender’s body made contact with Madueke’s back foot as he landed, resulting in the Arsenal player going down.
Verdict / Insight: In my view, this was a questionable decision by the referee that could have easily been overturned by VAR. Nevertheless, Tillman’s challenge was imprudent. By going to ground and failing to make contact with the ball, a defender risks causing a foul, particularly when challenging an opponent from behind while they are moving quickly.
There are two indicators in Madueke’s movement that suggest he was attempting to win a penalty rather than being fouled by Tillman. The initial contact occurs when Madueke kicks Tillman’s foot, and his immediate body posture indicates he is aware that his opponent is in a vulnerable position on the ground, leaving his left foot behind in an attempt to make contact with the falling defender. Additionally, the manner in which Madueke falls appears to be a calculated secondary action that is unrelated to the initial contact felt on his left foot, as he skillfully shifts his feet to lose his balance and go down.
The duration of the VAR’s review suggests he had reservations. However, by confirming the on-field decision, it is evident he did not believe there was sufficient evidence to indicate an obvious error that would warrant an on-field review.
