VAR Examination: Assessing the Controversy Surrounding Liverpool’s Mac Allister

The video assistant referee generates debate weekly in the Premier League, but what is the decision-making process, and are the outcomes accurate?

This season, we will analyze significant incidents to clarify the procedure, focusing on VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game.

Screenshot credit: BBC, TNT

Andy Davies (@andydaviesref), a former Select Group referee, has over 12 seasons of experience on the elite list, officiating in both the Premier League and Championship. With a wealth of experience at the top level, he has worked within the VAR framework in the Premier League, providing valuable insights into the processes, reasoning, and protocols implemented on a matchday.

Nottingham Forest 0-1 Liverpool

Referee: Anthony Taylor
VAR: Paul Tierney
Time: 90 minutes
Incident: Liverpool’s goal was disallowed due to a handball infringement in the buildup.

What happened: Forest defender Ola Aina attempted to clear the ball, but it deflected off Alexis Mac Allister and into the net.

VAR decision: Following a VAR review, the referee reversed the initial goal decision for Liverpool.

Taylor’s announcement stated: “After review, the ball strikes the arm of the goal scorer, Liverpool No. 10 [Mac Allister]. Thus, it is an accidental handball by the goal scorer, leading to a direct free kick.”

VAR review: A swift review by Tierney confirmed that the ball had indeed deflected off part of Mac Allister’s arm before entering the Forest goal, with the tolerance level set at the sleeve area.

Verdict: This VAR intervention was appropriate for the overturn, despite the potential harshness felt by Liverpool.

The law specifies that a goal cannot be scored using the hand or arm, regardless of whether it is accidental or unintentional.

Time: 97 minutes
Incident: A VAR check for offside on Virgil van Dijk prior to Mac Allister’s goal.

What happened: Mac Allister scored, but a VAR check was necessary for Van Dijk when the cross was delivered, as the Netherlands defender significantly influenced Mac Allister’s ability to reach the ball.

VAR decision: After the VAR review, the goal was confirmed as valid.

VAR review: Another relatively quick assessment, as the semi-automated technology indicated that Van Dijk was marginally onside.

Verdict: A close call, but Van Dijk was indeed just onside, despite initial replays suggesting otherwise.

play2:02Are Man City more confident in title charge after win vs. Newcastle

Don Hutchison and Steve Nicol discuss Manchester City’s Premier League title ambitions following their victory over Newcastle.

Manchester City 2-1 Newcastle United

Referee: Tom Bramall
VAR: James Bell
Time: 42 minutes
Incident: Disallowed goal for offside.

What happened? Newcastle’s Dan Burn headed in a Sandro Tonali free kick, but the goal was ruled out for offside. However, replays indicated that Burn was in an offside position solely because he was pushed by City defender Rúben Dias.

VAR decision: The VAR reviewed and upheld the on-field decision of no goal, confirming that an offside offense had occurred.

VAR review: Bell was likely aware of Dias’s deliberate action on Burn before the goal was scored. With the Newcastle defender clearly offside when he scored, the VAR check focused on the potential foul leading to the goal and whether it warranted a penalty kick.

The push was evident and intentional; however, the ball had not been played by Tonali at the moment of the push, preventing VAR intervention since the ball was inactive.

According to Law 12, direct and indirect free kicks and penalty kicks can only be awarded for offenses committed while the ball is in play.

Verdict: Upon reviewing the replays, Newcastle players and their supporters may feel aggrieved by this decision, which is understandable. The reality is that this was a calculated move by Dias and the City defense, who clearly understood the law and executed the push at the right moment.

Within the laws of the game, no offense occurred here, and only the referee can address physical contact before the ball is in play. The VAR cannot intervene without the ball being active, unless there is an act of violent conduct, which was not applicable in this instance.

Time: 51 minutes
Incident: Potential second yellow card for Man City’s Bernardo Silva

What happened: Silva had already received a caution, but moments later, he seemed to jump into Burn without attempting to play the ball. Was he fortunate to avoid a second yellow card?

VAR decision: The VAR did not consider this a potential red card challenge, and under current regulations, they cannot intervene in situations involving possible second yellow cards (only in cases of straight red cards).

Verdict: For a referee to issue a second yellow card in such a scenario, the challenge must exceed their threshold. It should be immediately apparent as a second yellow without hesitation, and the referee must recognize it in the moment.

When viewing this clip in isolation, Silva is fortunate not to have received a second yellow for what was an unnecessary challenge, as he made no attempt to play the ball.

However, in the context of a physical match, it was not a standout incident and likely did not cause Bramall significant concern in real-time.

In critical moments of significant matches, referees rely on their instincts, and this was a case of sensible game management, as issuing a second yellow card was not the most obvious conclusion.