The Premier League Match Centre team provides further information and context on the key operational and officiating themes from recent Match Rounds.
What is serious foul play?
Serious foul play has been a key topic in several of the recent Match Rounds. During Fulham’s match with Tottenham Hotspur in Match Round 13, Tom Cairney was shown a yellow card for a challenge on Dejan Kulusevski, which following an on-field review, was upgraded to a red. During West Ham’s Boxing Day game with Southampton in Match Round 18, Guido Rodriguez was shown a red card for a tackle on Kyle Walker-Peters, which following an on-field review, was downgraded to a yellow.
Both of these decisions relate to serious foul play. The International Football Association Board (IFAB), who are responsible for the Laws of the Game, clarify: "A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play."
Additionally, there are five considerations for serious foul play:
- Speed
- Intensity
- Force
- Degree of control
- Point and extent of contact (full/limited)
In the instances above, the VAR had to consider whether the referee’s call was a clear and obvious error. Cairney caught Kulusevski high up on the calf with a degree of force, which the VAR deemed was serious foul play and met the threshold for intervention, therefore recommended an on-field review. With Rodriguez’s red card, the referee’s call was that there was forceful contact by Rodríguez on Walker-Peters' shin, but the replays showed that the challenge was lower down and was minimal contact on the boot. The VAR therefore recommended an on-field review as this challenge didn’t meet the criteria for serious foul play.
See: Serious foul play
Challenges on goalkeepers
We often see outfield players and goalkeepers coming together in the penalty area during set pieces. Sometimes fouls are committed, and officials have to make a series of considerations when assessing incidents. Firstly, it’s important to note that contact is an acceptable part of football and attacking players are permitted to compete for space and a competitive advantage by being positioned close to a goalkeeper.
Officials will allow play to continue when both the attacker and goalkeeper are involved in simultaneous and/or similar actions. We saw this play out during Crystal Palace v Southampton in Match Round 19, when Aaron Ramsdale and Jean-Philippe Mateta challenged one another during a corner and Trevor Chalobah scored moments later. The referee deemed there was mutual contact and that no foul had been committed, which was checked and confirmed by the VAR.
When assessing challenges on goalkeepers, the officials will consider whether the attacking player only focuses on the goalkeeper, pays no attention to challenging for the ball and the contact clearly impacts the ability of the goalkeeper to make a save or challenge for the ball. Additionally, they will also judge whether attacking players have made non-footballing actions.
We saw this occur during Ipswich Town v AFC Bournemouth in Match Round 15. Ipswich scored from a corner, but the referee penalised Liam Delap for a foul on Kepa Arrizabalaga in the build-up. The referee’s call was that the forward wasn’t attempting to play the ball while he was also impacting Kepa’s ability to challenge for the ball, which was checked and confirmed by the VAR.
See: Additional guidance on challenges on goalkeepers
What happened when VAR was not in operation during Ipswich Town v Manchester United?
Match Round 12 saw Manchester United make the trip to Portman Road to face Ipswich Town. During the game, the Premier League Match Centre confirmed that the match was operating without VAR due to a fire alarm at the VAR Hub at Stockley Park. This occurred for a short period before VAR was back in operation.
In this situation the protocol was carried out by the on-field referee, who informed both club captains, while the fourth official informed both managers in the technical areas that VAR would not be in use. Premier League Match Centre also informed club administrative staff of the situation. There can be different reasons why VAR may not be in use, and if the situation does occur then Premier League matches are permitted to continue.
On-field and VAR performance
The independent Key Match Incident (KMI) Panel was introduced in Season 2022/23, with the panel members responsible for providing analysis and an independent assessment of both on-field and VAR decisions.
The results of the KMI panel suggest that the accuracy of officials in the Premier League has improved this season. The panel has adjudged that, up until and including Match Round 20, 87 per cent of on-field decisions have been correct before the use of VAR, a three per cent increase from the 84 per cent at the same stage of the 2023/24 campaign.
In addition, the panel has deemed that there have been 10 VAR errors during the first 20 Match Rounds of the 2024/25 season, a decrease from the 20 errors at the same stage of the 2023/24 campaign.
Lastly, VAR efficiency has also improved in the Premier League this season – the average VAR delay to matches in Season 2024/25 currently stands at 37 seconds per match, a significant reduction on the average delay of 68 seconds per match at the same stage in the 2023/24 season.
