Webb: Good use of VAR to overturn ‘penalty’ for Pope challenge on Gyokeres

News Story SkySports News Sports

add

PGMOL chief Howard Webb says it was “good use of VAR” to overturn Arsenal’s ‘penalty’ at Newcastle and explains Nick Pope’s challenge on Viktor Gyokeres was “quite different” to the foul committed by Chelsea’s Robert Sanchez that saw him sent off a week prior.

Magpies goalkeeper Pope eventually avoided conceding a penalty after he came out to challenge Gunners forward Gyokeres in the first half of Arsenal’s 2-1 win at St James’ Park. Running towards the ball in the Newcastle area, Pope rushed out to challenge Gyokeres, appearing to bring him down in the process.

Referee Jarred Gillett initially gave a penalty for the challenge; however, VAR Darren England recommended an on-field review. After around three minutes, Gillett then announced the decision had been overturned.

Bukayo Saka and Mikel Arteta were critical of the decision after the game. The pair questioned how it was deemed ‘clear and obvious’ to overturn the decision.

WHAT THE OFFICIALS SAID:

REF: On-field decision is a penalty. Nick Pope, a trip by Nick Pope.

VAR: OK, checking the on-field decision of penalty.

VAR: Got a better angle?

Replay Operator: Yeah, I’ve got a better angle from behind here.

VAR: Does he get a touch on the ball, the goalkeeper? I think he gets a touch on the ball. Nick Pope gets a touch on the ball here.

Assistant VAR: Yes, he does, yeah.

VAR: Does he? One more time. He actually gets a touch on the ball, doesn’t he?

AVAR: Yeah, there’s a secondary touch.

VAR: Give me another angle, please. Just make sure that Pope touches the ball, please.

Replay Operator: I’ve got an SSM (Super Slow Motion), but it’s from the other side.

VAR: He does touch the ball, doesn’t he? Touches the ball first, then there’s contact afterwards. Therefore, that’s not a penalty kick. He touches the ball there.

Replay Operator: This is the best angle.

AVAR: Have you got the behind view?

Replay Operator: Yeah, this is the best angle I’ve got.

VAR: He does, doesn’t he? He touches. OK, let’s just check the APP (Attacking Possession Phase) as it goes over as well.

AVAR: It’s definitely played by a defender. But check it anyway.

VAR: Jarred, I’m going to recommend an on-field review for possible no penalty. Let me know when you’ve got the monitor. I am going to check APP as well. Nick Pope gets a touch on the ball.

Replay Operator: I’ll go slowly so you can check the APP.

VAR: Yeah, yeah. It’s his defender, a clear defender, isn’t it? It’s always clear defender, that’s fine. The APP has been checked, the APP is clear as well. I’m going to show you the tight angle first with the ball being touched by Nick Pope. Any contact that happens thereafter, after the contact has been made.

VAR: Nick Pope gets a touch with his right foot, I’ll give you another angle on the touch.

REF: Show me a better angle to see that he touches the ball.

VAR: I will do, I’ll show you a better angle.

Replay Operator: Do you want the SSM from the other side?

VAR: Yeah, yeah, yeah, super slow. Super slow, coming in now. Gets a touch on the ball there. And then just plants his foot in a normal action.

REF: The attacker plays the ball first. I don’t know if the goalkeeper actually plays the ball.

VAR: The attacker plays the ball. Yeah, the attacker plays the ball, and the goalkeeper plays the ball then with his right foot, there.

REF: Just play it at full speed, please.

VAR: Any contact there, any contact after that is normal contact, because the goalkeeper just plays his foot.

REF: Can you play it at full speed?

VAR: Playing at normal speed for you.

REF: So I’m seeing the goalkeeper get a toe to the ball first, prior to making contact.

VAR: Agree.

REF: So after a view, the goalkeeper plays the ball, there’s no foul. Final decision, we drop ball.

VAR: Confirmed.

HOWARD WEBB’S VERDICT:

“At full speed, it looks a penalty, doesn’t it? And you can absolutely understand why the referee gave it from what he saw on the field.

“He gave it for a tripping action by Nick Pope. The VAR checks the penalty. Obviously, it’s a reviewable situation, penalties, goals, etc.

“So he checks the penalty, makes sure that the decision is not clearly wrong. When he does that, he clearly sees that Gyokeres gets to the ball, pokes it a little bit forward, but then, importantly, Nick Pope also gets a very clear touch on the ball as he steps forward with that right foot and deviates the direction that the ball is going.

“And that hadn’t been appreciated on the field by the referee. Pope then plants his foot on the ground. He doesn’t drive it forward into Gyokeres.

“There’s a gap, clearly a gap, between the two players after Pope has played the ball, and then the two players come together quite normally. The action by Pope is normal. It’s not reckless. It’s just a kick out towards the ball. The ball deviates.

“No contact on the player until the ball has been played away, and then the contact happens fairly normally. So, not a foul, and therefore a good use of the VAR to intervene to show the referee what really happened.

“The deviation’s quite clear. You’ll see that touch by Gyokeres, and you’ll see Pope’s right leg come in. It touches the ball, it moves the ball away in a different direction to the direction it was previously going in.

“When he then puts his foot on the ground, having made contact with the ball, there’s a separation between him and Gyokeres. There’s no contact at that point. The contact only happens after Pope has played the ball.

“So, it’s a good challenge by Pope. It’s not a foul, and there was an important part around this in that the referee didn’t recognise that touch by Pope in real time.

“Hence the reason that when the VAR saw it, he deemed it to be a clear and obvious error because that touch by Pope hadn’t been seen, and therefore the referee could go to the screen to look at that really important aspect and make a judgement for himself, and the judgement was: I’ve seen the touch, therefore it’s not a foul, and I’m going to start with the drop ball.

“The referee hadn’t recognised that touch, that was important, the VAR saw it and deemed it was a clear error. I agree with the VAR’s intervention, so the referee can go to the screen, look at the full sequence, see that touch, see that there was a normal playing action by Pope and the penalty was rightly cancelled.”

Why was it different to Sanchez’s challenge on Mbeumo?

A similar scenario happened during Manchester United’s 2-1 win over Chelsea. Early on in the game, an onrushing Sanchez hacked down Bryan Mbeumo just outside the area and was subsequently sent off for denying a clear goalscoring opportunity.

Webb’s verdict:

“I know people have compared the two situations. I think they’re really quite different, and we’ll talk about why.

“I think the only similarity is that there is a touch on the ball from the goalkeeper in both situations, but the way that touch happens is quite different.

“Now, in this situation, Sanchez was sent off for denying Mbeumo an obvious goalscoring opportunity. He committed a foul, which prevented Mbeumo from continuing through to try to score.

“When you see the way that Sanchez comes out to try to play that ball, whereas we saw Pope play the ball low, his foot went straight to ground, and then there was a normal coming together.

“In this situation, he leads with a raised leg and stud showing, which goes into the leg of Mbeumo. It’s at least a reckless action. Some people have talked about it, maybe even being more serious foul play, endangering the safety of the opponent.

“I think it’s reckless, at least. It has to be penalised. There is that small touch on the ball, but that doesn’t negate the fact you have to penalise this sort of action.

“And that touch, by the way, is quite different to the Pope one in that the ball doesn’t really deviate, it just continues.

“It touches the top of the boot of Sanchez, and then continues in the same line with Mbeumo about to run onto it. In Pope’s situation, we saw quite a deviation of that ball.

“So, for all of those reasons, this is absolutely something we have to penalise, primarily, though, because of the nature of the way that Sanchez went in, stood exposed on to the leg of Mbeumo.

“It has to be a foul. And then, of course, we know that the conditions are there for an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

“Mbeumo running on to that ball, the defenders are not there to cover. It’s obviously a goalscoring opportunity. And therefore, the red card comes out for that reason.”

WATCH: Webb’s verdict on Cash’s handball

This news was originally published on this post .