PGMO chairman Howard Webb felt referee Tony Harrington had “little choice” other than to send off Idrissa Gueye for slapping team-mate Michael Keane during Everton’s win over Manchester earlier this season.
When the pair came together after a heated argument at the end of Manchester United’s attack, Gueye clearly raised his hand at his Toffees colleague and turned red-faced.
Everton went on to win the match 1-0 despite the early red card, and manager David Moyes said after the game that he felt Harrington had rushed the decision. The player later revealed that the club’s appeal against the decision had been rejected, but said the FA had given him “no reason”.
A replay of the audio of the incident and subsequent VAR review on the latest edition of Sky Sports’ Mic’d Up revealed that VAR official Paul Howard deemed the contact to be a “clear blow to the face” and approved Harrington’s on-field decision.
Use Chrome Browser for a more accessible video player
PGMOL chairman Howard Webb explained on Match Officials Mic’d Up why the laws of the game meant that referee Tony Harrington’s only option was to give Idrissa Gay a red card for slapping teammate Michael Keane.
Officials say:
Referee: “Red card for (Guye)’s slap on the field.”
VAR: “We’re checking (Guay)’s on-field red card decision… There’s (Guay)’s action. Before that, I’d also like to check Michael Keene’s action here, please.”
Assistant VAR: “Yes, yes, I saw the slap.”
VAR: “Reviewing on-field red card decision.[Guay]clearly hit Michael Keene in the face.”
Webb’s verdict:
Idrissa Guye was sent off for violent behavior, which falls under article 12 of the law. According to Article 12 of the law, players can be sent off if they commit excessive violence or cruelty toward opponents, teammates, team officials, or match officials. So it will include teammates, which is unusual and many situations like this have never happened before.
However, the referee in this incident had little choice but to act according to the laws of the game after seeing Gay clearly slap his teammate Keane in the face.
I think the referee in this situation found himself in a pretty difficult position – we want referees to use their individuality – we always said that Law 18 is common sense and is the next law after the original 17, but the law should apply as well.
If it’s clear to your face that an act of violence has occurred and the rules of the game say it should be a red card, I don’t think there’s anything you can do other than send the player off, and I think the referee, Tony Harrington in this case, did the right thing.
Should Georginio Rutter’s equalizer against West Ham be a standout?
Use Chrome Browser for a more accessible video player
PGMOL chief Howard Webb explains why Georginio Rutter’s goal was allowed against West Ham despite a handball in the build-up
Giorgino Rutter’s second-half equalizer in Brighton’s 1-1 home draw with West Ham was checked by VAR for two potential problems: high footing and handball.
Charampos Kostoulas’ right boot almost made contact with the head of West Ham defender Konstantinos Mavropanos as he delivered an overhead kick, after which Rutter controlled the ball with the help of his right arm.
Rutters’ first shot was saved and Jan Paul van Hecke teed it up to score.
Officials say:
VAR: “Possibility of high foot, possibility of handball.”
Referee: “No. Goal.”
The referee told West Ham captain Jarrod Bowen: “There was an accidental handball in the possible build-up, but it wasn’t an intentional handball. It was an accidental handball, so hang in there.”
“A bicycle kick is never a foul to me. If it hit his right hand, that’s an accidental handball. To me, his hand was there. But they’ll look into it, okay?”
VAR: “It wasn’t right before the goal. So now we just have to decide whether it was a deliberate handball or not.”
Assistant VAR: “I don’t think it was a deliberate handball. The ball bounced off his thigh and his arm was in a natural position. Then Van Hecke bounced the ball back to him, so it wasn’t immediate. So I’d be happy to give him the award.”
VAR: “It was an unintentional handball. There may have been an accidental handball in the build-up, but it was not intentional.”
VAR turned to the referee and said, “OK, Simon (Hooper), check the on-field goal decision. There was an accidental handball by the 10th minute, but it wasn’t right before the goal. It went off the thigh and touched the arm. So, please confirm the on-field goal decision.’
Webb’s verdict:
This is a rather unusual situation, as the player who ultimately scored the goal, in this case Georginio Rutter, actually touched the ball with his hands during the attacking phase in front of the goal.
But the important thing is that he did not score immediately after that contact. In recent years, I have not been able to score a goal immediately after the ball hits my hand or arm.
The ball hit Rutter’s hand, but officials deemed it an accidental handball, after which he took a shot and Arreola made a good save to give the ball to Van Hecke, who actually passed the ball back to Rutter to score.
This is not an immediate goal. Van Hecke played a well-controlled pass back to Rutter, which reset the situation. Therefore, as long as the referee considers this to be an accidental handball rather than a deliberate handball, and as long as he does so in this situation, the goal is allowed.
“Everything he does is very natural. He prepares for the ball coming in, and the ball reaches his thigh first, but his arm doesn’t move at all. The ball is in the same position, quite low and natural, and that would be considered an unintentional handball, so the only time he could have been penalized was if he scored immediately, which he didn’t do.”
“So I agree with the officials: this is not a handball violation that would normally result in a penalty. For example, if it was a defender in the penalty area, we would not give them a penalty. So it could be considered an accidental handball.”
Great condition: “I think what we’re seeing is Kostoulas making really good contact with the ball with that athletic overhead kick, but in this case, there was very little contact on the opponent.
“The referee saw it in real time and we heard him mention it and he said the contact with the ball was good. VAR also saw that and decided that was exactly what it was and it was a good play of the ball without too much contact. If it had gone into the top corner I think most people would have wanted the ball to stand.”
Why did VAR intervene in Leeds’ penalty shootout against Liverpool…
Referee Anthony Taylor initially dismissed Leeds’ appeal for a penalty for Ibrahim Konate’s tackle on Wilfried Gonot, but VAR intervened and ordered the decision to be reviewed. Here’s why…
Use Chrome Browser for a more accessible video player
video without name
Mateta will benefit from legal reform…
Use Chrome Browser for a more accessible video player
video without name
Crystal Palace striker Jean-Philippe Mateta has become the first player to benefit from legal changes regarding accidental double touches when taking penalties against Manchester United.
Watch Match Officials Mic’d Up on Sky Sports Premier League on Tuesdays at 8pm.
