Question Number: 35722

Mechanics 9/25/2024

RE: Adult

Raphael of Motnreal, QC Canada asks...

Hey! A question regarding the game's rules:

A referee signals a fault for a handball outside the penalty area. The VAR asks for a review because both a) the handball was INSIDE the penalty area and b) the ball didn't touch the hand. So, fault signalling would result in a penalty kick, but reviewing would interfere with a not-reviewable incident. What would be the correct choice?

a) The referee must abide by his original decision, as the VAR would interfere with a not-reviewable incident.
b) The referee can review and decide on "no-fault."
c) Something else?

To make the question a little wider: Can the VAR end up reviewing a not-reviewable incident, even if the call was made for a reviewable one?

Thanks a lot!

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Raphael
Thanks for the question.
A penalty award is reviewable under the VAR guidelines. So if a referee awards a penalty kick erroneously then VAR can intervene and ask the referee to review the incident on the pitch side monitor.
If there was no handling the referee will restart with a drópped ball from where the ball was when play was stopped. If it was handling yet not inside the penalty area the restart is a free kick from the location of the offence.

The VAR guidelines also tells us that a free kick awarded to the attacking team and there is doubt whether it occurred inside or outside the penalty area can also be reviewed. So again if it is reviewed then a referee can be asked to review the incident on a pitch side monitor and make a decision.

As to what can be reviewed that is set out in the VAR protocol and the first decision is whether an incident can be reviewed or not. There are lots of incidents that are not reviewed such as a corner kick / throw ins, regular fouls that are not in an attacking phase etc.
Reviews are left for big ticket items that are defined as match changing incidents. It is not refereeing by video yet reviewing match changing situations where there is a clear and obvious error. At the highest level where VAR is in use we expect referees to be getting the majority of decisions correct. We know that at times things are missed or misjudged yet we only focus on the reviewable incidents as set out.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Raphael,
The location of the foul is more of a yes or no decision! VAR can weigh in on the absolutes but they have no jurisdiction on whether a referees opines it was or was not, as the discretion if it was a foul, has considerable leeway! PK incidents or the scoring of a goal are BIG ticket items as my colleague would say. So we really do need to get those right. If a referee or AR jumps the gun and sees something that from VAR perspective seemed erroneous. Var will request the referee should look the incident over to be certain. They can not MAKE a referee change a decision as the CR has final say but they can highlight an oops for him to correct!! Much like how the offside POSITIONAL determination is crucial to an outcome as a YES or NO decision! So too a BLADE of grass restart can be just as important in determining a PK or a DFK. If there is an inadvertent or accidental whistle the correct restart is a DB to the team in possession at the time of the stoppage EXCEPT if the incident is inside the PA then the keeper gets the restart! It might be 100% obvious a defender touched the ball on its way out into touch be it for a corner kick or attacking throw. However, if the CR/AR decided it was last touched by the attackers thus awarding a goal kick or defending throw in, nothing will come of it except the attackers wll be irritated, as those decisions are not reviewed! Unlike the tech that exists in the goal to judge if a ball has 100% completely crossed the goal line under the crossbar between the posts, there is no way for VAR to delegate final authority otherwise we go to laser pointers and a man in the sky directing traffic using a horn and a loudspeaker lol .
Cheers