VIDEO : Webb’s analysis of Gordon goal for Newcastle vs Arsenal

Howard Webb addresses the award of Anthony Gordon’s contentious goal for Newcastle against Arsenal and why Tottenham’s Cristian Romero saw red against Chelsea in the latest episode of Match Officials: Mic’d Up alongside former Liverpool and Man Utd striker Michael Owen

Anthony Gordon goal was checked for offside
In the latest instalment of Match Officials: Mic’d Up, PGMOL chief Howard Webb explains why Anthony Gordon’s goal for Newcastle against Arsenal survived various VAR checks, and dissects Cristian Romero’s red card in the frenzied game between Spurs and Chelsea.

The incidents reviewed…
Anthony Gordon’s winning goal for Newcastle against Arsenal.

The video you are trying to watch cannot be viewed from your current country or location
Listen to the full four-minute VAR check of Anthony Gordon’s controversial goal for Newcastle against Arsenal and PGMOL chief Howard Webb discussing the process of awarding the goal
Anthony Gordon’s strike survives multiple VAR checks and is awarded in favour of Newcastle against Arsenal.

Recommended byWhat is Outbrain

How was Machu Picchu discovered?
Michael Owen: What did you make of this situation?

Howard Webb: This was a big moment, an unusual situation with three aspects for the VAR to check whether the on-field decision of goal should be overturned.

We see the ball getting very close to the goal line, don’t forget we’ve got an assistant referee who was right in line. The ball does not have a lot of pace as it goes to the goal line, so he is looking right along the goal line, better than any of our cameras.

We know the ball is curved so it can be overhanging the line and we need evidence that it is out. The ball comes over and Joelinton challenges Gabriel. It could be a foul, it might be a foul. The VAR decides the evidence from the footage isn’t clear enough to intervene for a review for a clear error. The fact opinion is split after a lot of analysis since the situation suggests that was correct non-intervention because of that subjectivity.

And then one of those unusual situations where the ball goes between two players and trying to identify exactly when the ball leaves Joelinton is really difficult to establish. So again, no conclusive evidence that Gordon was offside when the ball was last touched to him. The VAR went through that diligently and identified no clear evidence to intervene to overturn the goal. The process actually was correct.

Also See:
Full audio transcript from Mic’d Up

Get NOW to stream big moments

Live Premier League table

Michael Owen: What did you make of Bruno Guimaraes and Kai Havertz tackles?

Howard Webb: Quite a busy game, a lot happening in this important game. A couple of situations that in the cold light of day and analysis that we go through, going forward we would expect red cards in both of those situations.

Read full official’s audio transcript from this incident

In full: Webb’s analysis of Newcastle penalty vs Wolves for Hwang challenge on Schar
ShareThis is a modal window.
Unsupported location
The video you are trying to watch cannot be viewed from your current country or location
Howard Webb joins Match Officials: Mic’d Up to explain why PGMOL believe that VAR got the Hee-Chan Hwang penalty wrong and describes what a ‘clear and obvious error’ is deemed to be
VAR failed to intervene when the on-field referee awarded Newcastle a penalty for a dubious challenge by Hee-Chan Hwang on Fabian Schar.

Michael Owen: That is adjudged to have been error. How did that happen?

Howard Webb: We said from the outset that VAR shouldn’t be re-refereeing the game. It should reserve itself for situations when a clear error has occurred on the field and the VAR steps in to have that rectified.

The VAR is looking for evidence of that clear error and weighing up the different considerations. For example, has the defender played the ball? Is there contact between the players?

In this situation we see that Hwang doesn’t actually play the ball, the ball is played on to him by Schar and then there is contact between the two of them. But what the referee has seen in real time is Hwang bring that leg through, making contact with Schar.

Now when we can see the replay, we can see that Hwang actually pulls his swing back a little bit and stops it from going right through and Schar just brings his foot through and there is contact. We feel this is a situation that reaches the threshold for being a clear and obvious error, even though there is contact and even though the ball isn’t played by Hwang.

We are asking the VAR going forward with that instruction to have a look at it, see where the considerations sit and if they don’t like the decision on the field ask the referee what they saw and if it is significantly different to what’s been shown on the video, then recommend a review so the referee can go to the screen and look at it again for himself.

The starting point being where the VAR thinks it’s a clear error. In this situation the VAR didn’t quite get there and in our opinion should have done.

Michael Owen: Does the high bar that we often refer to interfere with the decision-making process?

Howard Webb: We think the high-bar for intervention which we apply, which UEFA applies as well, is good for consistency. There’s a lot of subjective situations in our game which split opinion. We don’t want too much interference, we’ve seen negative comments about over-interference by VAR so reserving it for clear situations, we feel it serves the game best. Recognising those clear situations is important, it’s where we put a lot of time and effort into the training. This situation meets the threshold and that’s the advice that we have given our VARs moving forward.