Question Number: 34727

Mechanics 10/5/2022

Steve of Altadena, us asks...

This question is a follow up to question 34715

I think the panel missed an important aspect of the question. The VAR protocols allow for the review of the attacking phase of play ("APP") before a PK.

As the panel noted, the VAR really should have had play stopped sooner, but once VAR acted, it should first check the potential foul in the PA. If there was a clear and obvious error in not awarding the PK, then the VAR should check the APP. If the handling by team A in the APP was a clear an obvious error, then the FK for team B would take precedence over the PK, as it occurred in the APP.

Of course, this is a bit weird, as it takes away a goal form team B to give them a FK. As far as I know there is nothing in the protocols that really contemplates the extreme scenario, but I'm pretty sure the PK would mean the goal can't be awarded, but then the FK means the PK can't be awarded, so there is no goal and a FK for B.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Steve,
you could be right. A Pk foul on an offside opponent would certainly speak to that point. As you indicated this is a highly dark black hole matter in that its chances are about the same as two offside players from opposing teams are running after the same ball. A handling that occurs outside the PA is not an auto foul as it is inside. Outside it must be considered deliberate & if accidently beneficial it is not punished like it would be in the PA. The fact the defenders choose to commit a PK foul inside the PA on a non offside opponent and it was due to the missed handling earlier is a huge stretch unless the guy tucked the ball into his armpit and ran with it then and accept that was the case that the foul was so blatantly clear no other result is considered, The LOTG allow an referee to go back to unsighted occurrences in behind play but to miss two blatant fouls in a row with the first causing the second the referee is in for a long 90 minutes.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

hi Steve
From recent observations of what is happening in Europe there appears to be a disconnect between what is written and its application.

You make a good point and the VAR protocol allows for the consideration of an offence by the attacking team in the build-up to a penalty incident. As to timing on that it is not clear and I suspect it would have to be in the attacking phase to be considered. What that means is obviously in the training given to VAR officials.

So yes play could technically be brought all the way back to the original missed deliberate handling. It might be the *best* decision in the circumstances.

In the Ireland v Armenia penalty decision Armenia were complaining that the award of the corner kick to Ireland was incorrect which was then followed by the penalty call from the resultant corner. That is not part of a review.