Sky Sports pundits bemused as West Ham United robbed of equaliser at Chelsea, ex-referee baffled
Former referee Dermot Gallagher was at a loss to explain the decision to rule out the West Ham equaliser at Chelsea after a VAR review at the weekend.
Maxwel Cornet looked like he had bagged a late goal at Stamford Bridge on Saturday (3 September) that should have sent the Hammers home with a point, when he pounced on a loose ball and slammed it into the bet, before Andrew Madley ruled it out on review for a perceived foul on goalkeeper Edouard Mendy by Jarrod Bowen.
Gallagher doesn’t understand why Madley changed his mind when he already had the perfect view live, and pundit Stephen Warnock wants to know why referees hardly ever stick to their original decision when sent to the monitor.
Speaking on Sky Sports Ref Watch on Monday (5 September) the former top flight official said: “I don’t think it was a foul on Saturday and I don’t think it’s a foul now.
“It became complicated because the VAR got involved… This is the clue for me. The referee has got the best position he could have on the football field. He’s got everything in front of him… He’s got all the information.
“When he went to the VAR, he saw the same images, saw the same angle, so I don’t know what changed for him.
“The VAR focus on the goalkeeper. He felt he was injured and the law does saw if a goalkeeper’s injured, he’s genuinely injured on the floor, you have to stop the game in the penalty area.”
Warnock reasonably asked: “Dermot, why is there this reluctance for referees when they go to the monitor to say, ‘No, I’ve seen it differently live, in action’?
“We speak about this week-in, week-out, where we say everything looks worse slowed down… Every time it goes to VAR we know it’s going to be the other way don’t we?”
Pointless
The argument will rage around VAR for as long as it is in existence, and none more so than after a weekend like the one just gone.
But this is a case of a player seeing an opportunity to escape from a mistake and the referee somehow buying it, with the added element of VAR helping him do so.
Why Mendy hesitated to claim Reece James’ header back only he will know, but having done so he realised he had gifted West Ham an opportunity which Cornet gladly took.
Yes, there was contact from Bowen but it is a contact sport and the chances he was injured from the top of a trailing boot hitting him are tiny, so even allowing for the extra protection keepers need it was a pathetic decision.
Live, nobody would have seen a foul, and it was only once Mendy appeared injured that it was given a second look, and at such a key point in the game there is no harm in itself to ensure the right decision was made.
But as Warnock said, there was no reason Madley couldn’t look at the replays and decide he was right the first time.
Michael Oliver actually did that this weekend and has been lauded for doing so, which shows how inexplicably rare that is.
Decisions are subjective, and referees are human, but they are also professional officials of the most watched football league in the world, and for all the psychological elements that affect these situations they have to be making fewer high profile errors.
It is fine that VAR gave him a second look, but it is not fine that he has then gone and got it wrong.
Players will try to con referees, the evidence for that is plentiful in every game, but they will always have the incentive to do so if officials are going to fall into the trap of letting it pay off, and West Ham were on the receiving end at Stamford Bridge.