I'm in Arsenal fan and completely biased, but I don't see a difference between this call and the one that cost us the league two years ago. This was always going to be overturned by VAR, especially when the ball goes close to raya and affects the play, and they never look that closely at the other holding. This gets called at the 6th minute as well. You can complain about *why* this gets called, but I don't think you can complain about consistency. I think there's a clear difference between placing yourself near the keeper so that you are physically impeding and using your hand to hold down a keeper, and Yes, between the clutching and grabbing that is allowed player to player, and the clutching and grabbing that is allowed on the keeper on corners.
Brilliant. This one was a goal. VAR"s great, isn't it! pic.twitter.com/7K4nIsMk7m— Simon Curtis (@bifana_bifana) May 10, 2026 The predictable posts of "what about this?"
We conceded this earlier in the season and it got allowed pic.twitter.com/y59qCrAE7c— Harry (@Harry_Buckley17) May 10, 2026
Mean you can argue that's a foul or not, but that's clearly not the same thing! Different things can be different!
I mean we can do this all day. If that's all heading towards the keeper and it affects the play, that should be called a foul. A reply to that comment suggests that occurred a full second or two before the ball was even kicked.
Who is we? As for subjectivity people disagree with cold hard facts all the time. There is literally no consensus on the shape of the planet. I honestly don't get some of the gotchas people here have. After seeing video evidence the refs get it wrong.... so the video part of VAR is to blame
Yea we can’t be posting random screenshots without context or video, and claiming they mean anything. By the way, I definitely am not disagreeing with the claim that EPL VAR miss similar incidents earlier in the season. But we shouldn’t be complaining on the ones they get clearly right. This call doesn’t make prior mistakes ok, but it’s a great reminder of why VAR has a big value to the modern game, and why stakeholders aren’t going to be in a rush to get rid of it anytime soon.
Taking this single incident out of all context is the type of dispassionate take that, I would argue, almost no one invested in the game actually has. It's not that VAR "missed similar incidents." It's that this standard really hasn't been applied all season and I believe (happy to be corrected) this type of VAR intervention has occurred under a handful of times and may be unprecedented for the season. You are living in black and white referee outcomes, devoid of all context. No one else who cares about these matches is. They are living with what's happened all season and they know it, probably better than any of us. So then to say VAR got it right... well, yes, in a vacuum. But the season isn't in a vacuum. I mean, this is probably like a billion-dollar decision all things considered; saying or arguing it's technically correct isn't going to be enough with a lot of people. Also, I wouldn't even say that I'm "complaining." I just think it was inevitable. VAR used to get a "clear and obvious" decision correct and ALL the media coverage is about a "controversial" decision. People will keep saying otherwise, but below is not how VAR was sold:
Dale Johnson will (rightly, or at least defendably) point to an incident from a match in a previous season, ironically also involving Arsenal (vs. Leicester), for the precedent to disallow the goal. The threshold for 'more courageous decision -> less courageous decision' is completely different than vice versa; a lot of very 'clever' people will defend this decision in the media and say it is an excellent use of VAR... and, indeed, there is some merit to that pov. But, these are exact same people who also said the karate kick in Liverpool-ManCity two seasons ago or whenever (I can't even remember who the ref was but Attwell was the VAR) wasn't enough to give a penalty kick. What is irritating about this incident is that it is not unfair to say that completely 'un-refereeing' reasons placed allowing the goal as the 'more courageous' choice: even Kavanagh, completely subconsciously, standing where he would have if his decision was to disallow the goal; in fact, he had allowed the goal!(!!) Finally: the reason that the referee completely missed the incident is that he was stood much too square on from the corner kick; he needed to stand deeper and leftwards. (edit: the reason it was such a free-for-all in this penalty area was, exactly, because the players could feel that the referee had none of their duels in his visual control - indeed, Todibo very likely wouldn't have tugged Raya's shirt and Pablo wouldn't have held his arm had Kavanagh stood in a better place and been more preventative).
This is exactly the sort of un-biased analytical ref posts I come here to read and gain insight. Thanks for this.
https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_...-bowen-nuno-slam-arsenal-var-call-pl-physical As predictable as to what many on here saw VAR turning into. It's really amazing what VAR has done. Pre-VAR, we get a rant from Arteta and everyone else just shrugs and says "yeah it's probably a foul, but be stronger there" and everyone moves on. Now, we are getting complaints from all sides about consistency, clips of countless other goals allowed or holding on countless set pieces not given, etc.
Let's say there wasn't any contact on Raya, who in here wants to bet that VAR orders an OFR for a penalty kick there on one of the holds on West Ham? It's really interesting how VARs in all competitions are more likely to intervene to disallow a goal or cancel out a penalty kick given, but less likely to award penalty kicks.
In MLS/PRO, stats are kepts on the type/justification for an intervention. Penalty (award v annul), DOGSO (award v annul), etc. Do you have PGMOL stats on how many interventions overturned a goal awarded on-field that were for APP fouls and NOT for offside or accidental handling? In many competitions, this type of intervention is not uncommon (indeed, there were so many in MLS at one point that PRO reminded officials their threshold for these type of interventions was too low). In England, I think the bar is so high that it maybe hasn't been crossed all year until now. I remember the hand-in-the-face to (or by?) a Spurs player a few years back that I thought was a clear-as-day foul but caused havoc when it was given to annul a goal. I can't remember the last one given, but I admit there are weeks when I am somewhat absent from EPL watching.
hopefully this works - here's a free link to what I think is a pretty good summary of the play https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/7543595dd423ae13
This is spot-on. I can't wait until a microphone finds its way to Pep's vicinity. Though I suppose there is an argument that he just needs to focus his team and not get bogged down here.
As long as he's asked about the two or three decisions that went his way yesterday---sure, let's hear Pep weigh in.
I’m coming back here to point out that I’ve seen some screenshots on social media from a different angle that shows that the goalkeeper was also getting his shirt sleeve pulled, rather significantly, holding him down in addition to the arm across the chest. I haven’t watched that much EPL this year — I’ve had more pressing issues to deal with. So while I absolutely have this as the right decision, I have nothing to contribute on the overarching topic of consistency or lack thereof. So I guess from my unenlightened POV, my question would be why was VAR getting similar calls wrong? Lack of nerve? Subtle differences in the individual plays? I get the frustration. Ask an NHL fan what constitutes goaltender interference anymore, and then grab your preferred cleaning solution to wipe up exploding heads. It’s maddening. But the inconsistency there usually comes down to subtle differences in the circumstances of the play, because no two plays are equal. It’s easy to scream they called THIS but not THAT, but The Joker isn’t the Riddler. So if VAR has been wildly inconsistent, is it because it’s been overturning too often or not enough?
The top six--six(!)--articles on ESPNFC are directly and explicltly about VAR. I just don't know how people don't see or feel this. Imagine clicking through to a site about our sport in 2014 and finding this. And I am fully aware that clicks drive placement, so ESPN and other outlets know what they're doing here. They are feeding the beast. VAR creates controversy and controversy drives coverage. But this isn't about the sport. We've put officiating front and center in a way that is the exact opposite of what was argued, where VAR was supposed to help ensure referees weren't a constant talking point and a distraction from the sport. At this point, the sport seems to be a distraction from VAR.
If it was such a brave call, Arteta should have been calling for it when his own players did the same thing in Matchday 1 when they scored the game winner against United doing the same thing. Its a foul. It should be called. But let’s not ignore the 600lb gorilla in the room. They make that call about 1 time in 10 in the PL. And I wonder if they would have called the equally bad holding against Arsenal had the ball not gone in the net. Somehow I think not. Just be consistent. However you use it, be consistent. I’ll add that the same ESPN link talks about the elbow in the MU-SUN match that was not called and somehow they manage to argue that was not VC. It was an elbow strike to a head/neck from a player in open space coming from behind. It’s 100% intentional and should be a send off. It’s got no place in the game. Yet the “pundit” argues “well it’s not really forceful and we don’t want to alter the game with a send off”. What nonsense. It’s just another example of the complete inconsistent nature of how and when they choose to use the tool.
Former assistant referee Darren Cann has suggested a new rule change which means no attackers are allowed in the six-yard box for corners. What do you think?🤔 pic.twitter.com/oe4J5wvSYD— Match of the Day (@BBCMOTD) May 11, 2026 Love how we have to invent new rules to manage holding and grappling in the penalty area instead of you know doing your job. Yes, teams have taken it to an extreme, but only because referees have seemingly given up on trying to do anything about it. I get that you don't want to be awarding a bunch of penalties for holding, but there is an alternative solution and that is start calling more fouls coming out. That will decrease the contact created by attackers which will in turn make the contact by defenders more obvious and easier to call for referees and VARs. VARs and referees will be less likely to say "well I got holding by everyone here so check complete it."
Of course if this became a rule, referees would continuously err on the side of “common sense” an not punish attackers for being in the goal area by just a little bit, until eventually it’d be normal for attackers to be fully inside the goal area a whole second or more before the kick is taken because no referee wants to be the “ticky tack” ref who calls it.
really tough to monitor without VAR. With VAR, easy peasy—a player fully in the GA before the kick is taken is considered OSP and if the pkayer impacts play as set out in Law 11, no goal if scored. But the only way I see IFAB going down this path would be if a trial showed it resulted in more CK goals. I just don’t see a Law amendment making it harder to score. I’m also not sure how much positive impact it would really have—the grappling would just move to the top of the GA as defenders try to impede the movement of the attackers into the GA once kicked. And attackers try to set screens there to free teammates into the GA.
Well then it sure is a good thing that there’s never any controversy about whether a player in an “offside” position in the goal area has impacted on play!