Ref Watch: Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher dissects the flashpoints from a weekend of VAR controversy | Football News

Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher dissects the flashpoints from a weekend of VAR controversy in the top flight, including drama at the Emirates and Selhurst Park.

Arsenal 1-1 Brentford

INCIDENT: The Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) has acknowledged a ‘significant error in the VAR process’ was responsible for Brentford’s offside goal being awarded in their 1-1 draw at Arsenal. This was not fully investigated by VAR. They checked for a block – but not the offside on Christian Norgaard. How can this happen?

DERMOT SAYS: “If the referee thinks he’s had a materialistic impact on the player, yes [they can be offside].

“When the free kick comes over, Ethan Pinnock – who starts in an offside position – that’s all he is. He can’t be given as offside at that point because he hasn’t impacted on the outcome of that ball.

“Pinnock gets back into an onside position and the next problem comes when Pinnock has come from an offside position, but when the ball is played while he’s onside, once he heads it, it’s Norgaard – he’s the player who is in the offside position.

“Norgaard then crosses and Ivan Toney scores.

“Lee Mason made two checks and they were very comprehensive – it took three minutes.

“He has deemed Pinnock is in an offside position – there’s no doubt about that. He’s decided because the ball is so high, he cannot head the ball so he’s not interfering with play because he’s not touched it.

“Does he impact on a defender? I think the VAR looks at it and he’s behind it, so it’s difficult. He judges it as not a foul, which is a subjective element.

“He’s concentrated on that so much that I think he switches off then. He’s forgotten to complete it through.

“It’s not panic, but it’s ‘I’ve taken three minutes and haven’t found an offence, people are going to wonder why I’ve checked it so often’.

“He then doesn’t check the Norgaard offside, and that’s where the problem occurred.

“It’s a human error bought on by the fact that time is eating away and three minutes are an eternity to a spectator. You can hear them, and that’s got to play on his mind.

“He’s just closed it off a bit too early.”

Why didn’t the VAR assistant point out the error?

DERMOT SAYS: “I don’t know to be honest. Again, I wonder if he’s been sucked into the same vacuum in terms of the time.

“If they had pushed on that little bit further, they would have got the right answer.

“In my mind, it was easy to go ‘Ivan Toney scored, was he offside? No. Default to Norgaard crossing the ball. Was he offside? Yes. End of story.’

“That’s the easy bit. But in their process, they take it from the free-kick and that’s how they do it.”

Kevin Campbell: “It’s great to know there’s an apology, but what does it actually do? Because all the eyeballs that are on [the game] – the VAR official has an assistant, but what do they see?

“If everybody else could see it, they should be able to see it.

“More training? Come on, this is crazy stuff, as far as I’m concerned. It’s just people not doing their job properly – it’s as simple as that.”

Crystal Palace 1-1 Brighton

INCIDENT: There was another huge error at Crystal Palace. The PGMOL have apologised to Brighton after admitting the VAR made a mistake in disallowing Pervis Estupinan’s goal for offside because they drew the lines wrong – again how can this happen?

DERMOT SAYS: “It’s just a human error. They put the lines across, go through James Tomkins’ body. If you look across Marc Guehi is further behind, there’s no doubt about that.

“If they had drawn the line through his body, Estupinan would’ve been onside and the goal is given.

“It’s one you have to say sorry for. It’s human error made by VAR.”

In response to both incidents, the PGMOL confirmed its chief refereeing officer Howard Webb has contacted both Arsenal and Brighton to acknowledge and explain the significant errors in the VAR process in their respective fixtures.

John Brooks, the VAR who wrongly disallowed Estupinan’s goal for Brighton, has since been replaced for two matches he was due to officiate this week.

Brooks had been due to act as VAR for Monday night’s Merseyside derby, live on Sky Sports, and the Arsenal vs Manchester City match on Wednesday, but the PGMOL has confirmed Brooks has been replaced by Andre Marriner and David Coote respectively for those fixtures.

DERMOT SAYS: “I’ve had nights where I’ve driven back and it’s been torturous. It’s the worst journey of your life because you’re thinking ‘that hasn’t gone well’.

“You either need one of your friends to ring you up and say ‘don’t dwell on that, think of all the good things you’ve done’ and it picks you back up.

“Or you need a game to get straight back into it. That’s how I was. Not everybody is the same and some people want to take the time.

“Maybe John Brooks needs that time.”

Sue Smith: “The Arsenal error, that could cost them the title. If they lost the title by two points, that’s massive.

“It could be the same with Brighton getting into Europe, if there are two points in it. It’s huge for that football club. The offsides need to be right.”

West Ham 1-1 Chelsea

INCIDENT: Chelsea thought they should have had a penalty late on at West Ham for a handball by Thomas Soucek. Why wasn’t this given?

DERMOT SAYS: “It’s definitely a penalty. I’ve spoken to very few people who don’t think it’s a penalty.

“VAR felt it fell into this bracket of falling and the arm hitting the floor, and the ball striking the arm.

“If you look at Soucek, he doesn’t fall to the floor – he actually drives towards the ball. It’s a goalkeeper-type movement.

“I think that’s what the VAR got seduced by – the idea of falling to the floor. But again, if you look at it a few times, it’s certainly a handball penalty.”

Sue Smith: “It’s absolutely a handball. I was watching the game and I can’t believe this wasn’t given. There was no reason for him to go down apart from handling the ball.

Kevin Campbell: “As soon as I saw that I thought it was a penalty. This could have repercussions for Chelsea later down the line.”

Southampton 1-2 Wolves

INCIDENT: There was plenty of initial confusion as to why Wolves’ Mario Lemina was sent off for a second yellow card against his former club Southampton. Can you clear this one up for us?

DERMOT SAYS: “He was on a yellow card and play was going on. I think he spoke to the referee in play and when it was stopped, he ran towards the referee.

“The referee took umbrage with what he said and felt it was a second yellow card and sent him off.

“Dissent is all about how the referee perceives it. Is it visual? Is it aggressive? Is it verbal?

“He felt that Lemina was the one he was going to take action against and unfortunately, he got a second yellow card.”

Sue Smith: “I thought it was a harsh decision. I thought Jarred Gillett lost a little bit of control in that first half.”

Man City 3-1 Aston Villa

INCIDENT: Manchester City had a goal ruled out after the referee felt there was a foul from Erling Haaland on Emiliano Martinez. Was that a good decision from the ref?

DERMOT SAYS: “I think whether this was a foul or not, with the goalkeeper ending up on the floor, you have to stop the game. But if you look at the way he goes into him, it’s a free-kick.”

INCIDENT: Jack Grealish won Manchester City a penalty after a challenge from Jacob Ramsey. Gary Neville said on Super Sunday that Grealish played for that. Was it a penalty?

DERMOT SAYS: “I think it’s a penalty. The push isn’t enough but he clips his heels.

Kevin Campbell: “He makes it look theatrical, but he trips him.”