Products You May Like
The Premier League‘s Independent Key Match Incidents Panel has ruled that there was only one VAR error of three incidents Nottingham Forest complained about following their controversial 2-0 defeat at Everton on April 21.
Forest reacted angrily to a series of penalty decisions which went against them, calling into the question the integrity of the VAR, Stuart Attwell, a supporter of Luton Town who were at the time in a relegation battle with the two clubs.
– Stream on ESPN+: LaLiga, Bundesliga, more (U.S.)
“Three extremely poor decisions — three penalties not given — which we simply cannot accept,” the club wrote on Twitter. “We warned the PGMOL that the VAR is a Luton fan before the game but they didn’t change him. Our patience has been tested multiple times. NFFC will now consider its options.”
The Football Association (FA) is investigating the nature of Forest’s initial tweet, as well as comments made by boss Nuno Espirito Santo and defender Neco Williams. Former Premier League referee Mark Clattenburg, who is employed by Forest as a consultant, has also been asked to explain the contents of a newspaper article he wrote on the officiating.
However, the panel’s findings, which have been seen by ESPN, unanimously said that a penalty claim for a foul by Ashley Young on Giovanni Reyna and a later handball by Young were unfounded and should not have led to a VAR intervention. The panel did unanimously vote that Young should have been penalised for a spot kick in the second half for bringing down Callum Hudson-Odoi inside the area.
On the possible foul on Reyna in the 24th minute, the panel said that “the ball isn’t played, there is contact by the defender on the attacker but any contact is minimal and is exaggerated by the attacker, and falls below the high threshold for a penalty.”
The panel did have a split 3-2 vote that referee Anthony Taylor’s decision not to a handball against Young in the 44th minute was correct, but voted 5-0 against a VAR intervention. It was said that it was “a very subjective call. Young’s arm is out and blocks a cross but the ball hits from close proximity” and that the arm was in a justifiable position.
However, on the foul on Hudson-Odoi in the 55th minute it was said that “Young inherits the risk by going to ground from the wrong side and Hudson-Odoi beats him to the ball. It is a foul.”
The panel has five members, made up of three former players and/or coaches, plus one representative each from the Premier League and PGMOL. It was set up at the start of last season to give an independent assessment of decision-making rather than relying on the views of PGMOL or the clubs themselves. The judgement is intended to provide an arm’s-length assessment of all major match incidents.