How Arsenal looked ‘flawless’ in win vs. West Ham (1:46)Don Hutchison and Julien Laurens analyse Arsenal’s Premier League win over West Ham. (1:46)
Dale JohnsonOct 6, 2025, 07:16 AM ETCloseFollow on X
Possible penalty overturn: Position of foul by Diouf on Timber
Possible penalty overturn: Challenge by Sesko on Hume
Possible penalty: Challenge by Lammens and Fernandes on Traoré
Possible penalty: Challenge by Szoboszlai on Garnacho
Possible red card: Violent conduct by Flemming on Buendía
Possible red card: Violent conduct by Uche on Tarkowski
Video Assistant Referee causes controversy every week in the Premier League, but how are decisions made, and are they correct?
In this week’s VAR Review: Should Arsenal’s penalty against West Ham United have been cancelled? What happened with Sunderland’s overturned spot kick at Manchester United? And why didn’t Alexander Isak win a penalty for Liverpool at Chelsea?
What happened: Arsenal were awarded a penalty in the 67th minute when Jurriën Timber raced onto a pass and was brought down on the edge of the area by El Hadji Malick Diouf. Referee John Brooks pointed to the spot, and it was checked by the VAR, Michael Oliver.
– Lindop, Olley: After dramatic Chelsea win, are Liverpool in crisis? – Dawson: Pressure eases on Amorim — but for how long? – Ogden: Hollywood derby gives us gritty realism rather than fairy tale
There’s a very strong argument that Diouf does foul Timber before the two players reach the box. The West Ham player is starting to climb over his opponent before they get to the line, and it really should have been a free kick … but it’s tight.
Subjective or objective? Oliver opted to leave the decision on the field, but would he have advised a penalty if a free kick had been given? It’s highly unlikely.
What happened: Saka thought he had fired Arsenal into the lead in the 24th minute when he ran onto a pass over the top by Declan Rice. After the ball ended up in the net, the assistant referee raised the offside flag and the goal was disallowed.
VAR review: As the ball was floated into the area, it bounced off the head of Diouf and dropped perfectly for Saka.
Verdict: There are two considerations for the VAR. Firstly, did Diouf make a “deliberate play” (meaning controlled) which would reset Saka’s offside position? As the ball simply landed on the West Ham player’s head, rather than him actually attempting to head it, this wasn’t a “deliberate play” so Saka remains offside
Even if it was a “deliberate play,” Saka is so close to the defender that it would have been valid to consider whether the Arsenal forward had impacted or influenced him into playing the ball, so it’s highly unlikely the VAR would have stepped in.
What happened: Saka helped the ball into the area at the start of the second half, and it touched the arm of West Ham defender Konstantinos Mavropanos. Play continued, but was there a case for a penalty?
VAR review: The VAR determined that this was just part of Mavropanos’ running action, and the ball inadvertently touched his arm rather than the defender making his body unnaturally bigger, or making any deliberate action.
Verdict: The Premier League’s more-lenient application of the handball law gives far more consideration for how a player is naturally moving. There’s a chance this would be given as a spot kick in one of the other major European leagues, but it won’t be sent to review in England.
What happened: Sunderland delivered a long throw into the area in first-half stoppage time. As Trai Hume looked to win the ball, he went to ground under a high-foot challenge from Man United’s Benjamin Sesko. Referee Stuart Attwell allowed play to continue and, when the ball went out of play for a corner, the assistant advised that a penalty should be awarded. It was checked by the VAR, Neil Davies.
Verdict: It was a confusing situation at first, because of the delay between the incident and the penalty being awarded, and it may incorrectly have appeared that the VAR was advising a spot kick. But this was undoubtedly a correct intervention to cancel the penalty.
Usually, an overturned spot kick results in a restart with a dropped ball to the goalkeeper, because it has stayed in play. But when the ball has very clearly gone out of play before a penalty is given, the game restarts normally — in this case with a corner to Sunderland.
What happened: Bertrand Traoré was booked for simulation in the 57th minute when he went to ground when trying to get past goalkeeper Senne Lammens and midfielder Bruno Fernandes on the edge of the box.
Verdict: While Traoré went down a little theatrically he was probably unfortunate to pick up a yellow card, as he was nudged by the United captain as he tried to get past him.
What happened: Alejandro Garnacho moved into the penalty area in the 39th minute and went to ground under pressure from Dominik Szoboszlai. The Chelsea winger looked at Anthony Taylor asking for a penalty, but the referee waved away the claims. It was looked at by the VAR, Craig Pawson.
What happened: Alexander Isak ran onto a ball through the center in the 73rd minute, and went down after being hit in the head by a flailing arm from Reece James. No penalty was awarded, so the VAR had a look.
VAR review: While Isak was caught in the face, this only came after the striker had pulled James back by his shirt.
Verdict: Arne Slot was annoyed by this decision, because Liverpool had conceded a penalty at Galatasaray in the Champions League on Tuesday when Szoboszlai caught Baris Alper Yilmaz in the face inside the area.
That’s not to say the Galatasaray penalty wasn’t exceptionally soft, but it doesn’t mean James should also be penalized, and definitely not through a VAR intervention.
What happened: James Hill lofted a ball into the area in the 54th minute, with Evanilson going to ground under a challenge from Issa Diop. Referee Simon Hooper wasn’t interested in the penalty appeals, so it was checked by the VAR, John Brooks.
Verdict: Cast your mind back to the start of last season and the VAR penalty awarded to Fulham against Nottingham Forest, when Murillo stood on the heal of Andreas Pereira with the ball in the vicinity. The VAR? John Brooks.
What happened: Zian Flemming took control of the ball in the third minute of stoppage time, holding off Emiliano Buendía before then having his progress blocked. Buendía went down holding his face but referee Andrew Kitchen, in his third Premier League game, allowed play to continue. It was checked by the VAR, Michael Oliver, for a possible red card.
VAR review: Flemming had his arm raised when Buendía came in from his blind side, with the Burnley player positioned to protect the space rather than throwing an elbow.
Verdict: This should at least have been a free kick to Aston Villa, and there’s an argument it should have been a yellow card. But there was no force or brutality in the way Flemming tried to hold off the Aston Villa player, and not deliberate act.
Two seasons ago, Fulham’s João Palhinha escaped a red card after he caught Brighton’s Pascal Groß on the head with an arm when trying to keep possession. In that case, there was a clear movement into the opponent, with the Premier League’s Key Match Incidents Panel (KMI) voting 3-2 that it was a missed VAR intervention for a red card.
What happened: Newcastle United won a corner in the 54th minute; as it was delivered into the box, Dan Burn went down under pressure from Morato. Referee Peter Bankes allowed play to continue, and VAR Chris Kavanagh checked it out.
VAR review: Initially the two players were involved in mutual holding, before Burn broke free. Morato didn’t seem to be interested in challenging for the ball, only stopping Burn from doing so. But the referee decided there wasn’t enough in it to give a penalty.
There was a strong case for a penalty for a holding offence after Burn tried to get away from Morato, who can consider himself very fortunate.
The closest example is probably West Ham’s Mateus Fernandes holding back Tottenham Hotspur’s Micky van de Ven last month. That wasn’t given as a spot kick, which the KMI Panel supported on a split 3-2 vote for both on-field and VAR judgements. But due to the non-footballing nature of the challenge, this could go down as a missed intervention.
What happened: The game was deep into added time when there was a VAR check for a possible punch by Christantus Uche on James Tarkowski. Should there have been a red card?
Verdict: Would there have been a different outcome had Tarkowski fallen to the ground? Possibly, but the fact the Everton player barely had any reaction should be a decent indicator that there was very little in this.
Verdict: This would be considered a factual overturn, so the VAR alone would make the call and the referee wouldn’t be sent to the monitor. Yet other than situations determined by semi-automated offside technology, there’s no decision which is truly factual. The VAR is still looking at TV evidence and making a subjective judgement: Where did the foul take place? Was it handball by the goal scorer? Did the ball go out of play? The fact that different VARs could reach opposing judgements makes it subjective.
How Arsenal looked ‘flawless’ in win vs. West Ham (1:46)Don Hutchison and Julien Laurens analyse Arsenal’s Premier League win over West Ham. (1:46)
VAR decision: Penalty stands, scored by Bukayo Saka.
Verdict: Definitely not enough in this for the VAR to get involved.
The Flemming incident doesn’t fall into the same category, so this won’t be seen as an error.
A bizarre move by Uche, but there was not enough in it for violent conduct.
Don Hutchison and Julien Laurens analyse Arsenal’s Premier League win over West Ham. (1:46)