Video Assistant Referee causes controversy every week in the Premier League, but how are decisions made, and are they correct?
After each weekend we take a look at the major incidents, to examine and explain the process both in terms of VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game.
In this week's VAR Review: Looking at Robert Sánchez's red card for Chelsea at Manchester United, a possible offside on Bruno Fernandes' goal and a potential penalty. Plus, should Newcastle United have been awarded a penalty against AFC Bournemouth?
Man United 2-1 Chelsea
Possible offside: Fernandes when scoring
What happened: Bruno Fernandes gave Manchester United the lead in the 14th minute when he timed his run to score from close range after a Patrick Dorgu headed pass. Was there a case for offside, against Fernandes ... or Benjamin Sesko? (watch here)
VAR decision: Goal stands.
Take a look at how Bruno Fernandes stayed onside for Manchester United's opening goal against Chelsea.
VAR review: Last month, Lyle Foster thought he had equalized for Burnley against Man United, but the flag went up for offside after he put the ball into the net. The VAR upheld the decision through semiautomated offside technology (SAOT), but the animation didn't really answer the question of how exactly Foster was offside.
Both Foster and Fernandes seem to have their sleeve highlighted in a similar way. Yet this decision was the reverse, with Fernandes the onside call upheld.
There was also a question about Sesko, who was in an offside position but didn't do anything to become active. Trevoh Chalobah was pushing up so isn't being prevented from going for the ball, while Sesko wasn't challenging him and made no attempt to play the ball himself. Had Chalobah been moving in the opposite direction, so trying to get to Fernandes, that would have changed the considerations and a likely offside offense.
Verdict: The issues with the clarity of the offside animation in tight situations continues. Some fans will look at the final images and feel that both Fernandes and Foster look identical, with the sleeves of both players through the "virtual offside wall." It's a case of the two incidents being either side of the Premier League's built in tolerance level -- there's always going to be situations which are close but have opposite final outcomes.
Take a look at the VAR decision for Lyle Foster's disallowed goal for Burnley vs. Manchester United.
Possible red card overturn: DOGSO by Sánchez on Mbeumo
What happened: Bryan Mbeumo raced through on goal in the fourth minute and was brought down by Chelsea goalkeeper Robert Sánchez. Referee Peter Bankes gave the free kick and produced a red card for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (DOGSO). It was checked by the VAR, Craig Pawson.
VAR decision: Red card stands.
VAR review: Referee Bankes took a couple of seconds to weigh up the situation and discuss the merits of a DOGSO red card with the rest of his team, but there was little complaint when the red card came out.
There might be a small question about Mbeumo getting to the ball first ahead of two Chelsea defenders, but that's the only discussion point about the quality of the goal-scoring chance.
Take Sánchez out of the picture, and Mbeumo would have been able to run through to an empty goal requiring only one touch to score.
Sanchez did get a small touch on the ball after it was played by Mbeumo, but that's outweighed by the reckless nature of the challenge -- and the DOGSO situation.
The height of Sánchez's challenge had to be considered for serious foul play too, though there wasn't enough force. It does raise a question: Should the VAR send the referee to the monitor if a more serious disciplinary event is missed? After all, it would be upgrading a one-match ban to three.
Verdict: Cast your minds back to Gameweek 2 when Manchester City goalkeeper James Trafford collided with Tottenham Hotspur forward Mohammed Kudus. The incidents happened in the same area of the pitch, with both goalkeepers going into the challenge with a raised boot -- but Trafford escaped without sanction.
The key difference: The ball ran through into the box for Mbeumo, while Trafford deflected it away from goal just before the potential foul. So, Mbeumo has a very strong likelihood of taking control and having the scoring opportunity, but for Kudus the ball is no longer in his running path.
Possible penalty: Mazraoui challenge on Pedro
What happened: João Pedro moved into the penalty area in the 34th minute and went to ground under a challenge from Noussair Mazraoui. Referee Bankes wasn't interested in a penalty, and it was checked by the VAR.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR review: Mazraoui played the ball before making contact with the Chelsea attacker, meaning this would be seen as a fair challenge.
Verdict: Getting a touch on the ball doesn't remove the possibility of a penalty, but the challenge would need to be reckless to override it.
There is natural contact between Mazraoui and Pedro after the play of the ball, and it's not enough for a spot kick. And had one been awarded it's very likely there would have been a VAR review to overturn it.
Possible red card: Cucurella challenge on Mazraoui
What happened: Marc Cucurella was shown a yellow card in the 44th minute for a strong challenge on Mazraoui, but was there a case for a red card?
VAR decision: No red card.
VAR review: While Cucurella does leave the ground to make the challenge, it's low and into the ball rather than the opponent.
Verdict: A yellow card is a perfectly acceptable disciplinary outcome in this case. No VAR intervention necessary.
Bournemouth 0-0 Newcastle
Possible penalty: Handball by Tonali
What happened: AFC Bournemouth won a free kick on the left flank in the 28th minute. It was swung into the area by David Brooks and after Dan Burn missed his header the ball hit the arm of Sandro Tonali. Referee Rob Jones allowed play to continue and it was checked for a penalty by the VAR, Matt Donohue.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR review: That the ball came to Tonali slightly unexpectedly would have been taken into consideration by the VAR. Indeed, there have been several examples of defenders being given far more leeway when the ball drops onto them when they might have been unsighted.
In addition, guidance allows officials to take into account a player making an instinctive action to protect themselves, and even if the arm is raised that can be a mitigating factor against handball.
Verdict: There's been an uptick in handball penalties in the Premier League this season, but the interpretation is still far more lenient than on the continent.
Possible penalty: Diakité challenge on Woltemade
What happened: Valentino Livramento played a cross into the area in the 51st minute. Nick Woltemade took a heavy touch, then went to ground looking for a penalty for a shirt pull from Bafodé Diakité -- but the referee wasn't interested.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR review: A holding offense is defined as being a situation where "a player's contact with an opponent's body or equipment impedes the opponent's movement."
Diakité was holding Woltemade's shirt -- but was that enough for a penalty? Was it really impacting Woltemade, or was he trying to win the spot kick?
The VAR will always take into account the manner in which an attacker goes down. If it appears they have embellished to try to get a decision there is far less chance of a VAR intervention.
Verdict: Man United were given a VAR penalty against Burnley when Amad had his shirt pulled away from his body by Jaidon Anthony.
While there was holding by Diakité, it was nowhere near as sustained or as blatant. Also, when watched at full speed the possible offense by Diakité is barely identifiable.
Had the referee given the penalty it wouldn't have been overturned, but it would have been a very soft VAR intervention.
Fulham 3-1 Brentford
Possible disallowed goal: Challenge by Muniz on Collins
What happened: Rodrigo Muniz scored a fourth goal for Fulham in the 59th minute, but as the players celebrated Brentford defender Nathan Collins was on the ground holding his face asking for a foul. Referee Michael Oliver had allowed play to continue and it was checked by the VAR, Jarred Gillett.
VAR decision: Goal disallowed.
VAR review: Collins was about to challenge Muniz for the ball when he was caught in the face by a stray arm from the Fulham attacker. It was accidental, but it clearly prevented the Brentford defender from being able to compete for the ball.
Verdict: A few weeks ago, a VAR-disallowed Fulham goal against Chelsea caused huge controversy, when Muniz was penalized for a supposed foul on Trevoh Chalobah in the buildup to a Josh King goal.
Chalobah was not in a position to go for the ball and the coming together had no direct influence on the outcome of the move. But for Collins, the ball was dropping into his direct area and he would have been able to challenge Muniz, who was then able to receive a pass and run clear to score.
Sunderland 1-1 Aston Villa
Possible red card overturn: Violent conduct by Reinildo
What happened: Reinildo Mandava was shown a red card by referee Sam Barrott in the 33rd minute when the Sunderland player was adjudged to have kicked out at Matty Cash. It was checked by the VAR, James Bell.
VAR decision: Red card stands.
VAR review: Reinildo reacted to a challenge by Cash by pushing his boot into the midriff of the Aston Villa defender. Barrott kept an eye on the two players as the ball went forward and spotted the violent conduct.
Verdict: In December 2019, the first season of VAR, Tottenham's Son Heung-Min was shown a red card by referee Anthony Taylor for a very similar kick out at Chelsea's Antonio Rüdiger. Spurs lost an appeal against the forward's three-match ban.
But just two months later, Man United's Harry Maguire escaped a red card against Chelsea when it was decided his act on Michy Batshuayi was petulant rather than violent. Maguire should consider himself extremely fortunate there was no VAR intervention because this kind off act should result in a red card.