How the 2024-25 Premier League table would look without VAR ‘errors’ | OneFootball

During the 2024/25 Premier League season, we’re asking Squawka followers to vote on each gameweek’s most controversial video assistant referee (VAR) calls.

The results will form an alternative table so that, by next May, we can see which teams will be cursing VAR (and which will be secretly pleased the Premier League clubs didn’t vote to get rid of it).

Or maybe it will even reveal that much criticism of VAR is overblown…

The 2024-25 Premier League table without VAR ‘errors’

The Professional Game Match Officials Ltd (PGMOL) says that last season more than 100 errors were corrected by VAR.  Still, the Premier League acknowledges much work must be done to improve the perception of VAR. Why else would Wolves’ trigger a vote on whether it should be scrapped in June?

While VAR will never be perfect, there were still the usual eyebrow-raising interventions — or lack thereof — during the opening round of 2024/25 fixtures. We put five to our followers on X (formerly Twitter) and two were voted to be ‘errors’.

Neither was technically result-altering, although one penalty shout during from Chelsea vs Manchester City (see below) could have tied the scoreline and swung the momentum in the Blues’ favour. As we can only mark it as a goal, it simply narrows the margin of defeat in the table below.

Note: Our table has been compiled on the basis that penalties that should have been awarded would subsequently have been scored. Over the past seven seasons, 78% of Premier League penalties taken have been scored.

Elsewhere, Fabian Schar’s red card — which our followers saw as unfair — will have ongoing repercussions for Newcastle as they deal with the centre-backs’s violent conduct suspension.

How many VAR ‘errors’ have gone against your team?

GW1 VAR controversies

Omitted from gameweek one’s selection is Crystal Palace midfielder Eberechi Eze’s brilliant goal during his side’s loss to Brentford. Although the whistle was blown before the ball crossed the goal line, the VAR could not intervene to check Will Hughes’ challenge with Nathan Collins to potentially overturn the on-field decision.

“I was told [by the referee] that he blew too early and made the mistake,” Eze told BBC Match of the Day. “It could have changed the game but we have to deal with it.”

Palace head coach Oliver Glasner said by admitting “he made a mistake” referee Sam Barrott “showed he is a great man”.

Did Chelsea deserve a penalty for Kovacic’s handball?

Chelsea were not awarded a penalty despite the ball touching Mateo Kovačić’s hand. This decision is based on the referee and VAR’s interpretation of the latest handball law implemented by the Premier League. The incident happened when Kovačić and Malo Gusto went for a 50-50 challenge inside the City box in the 77th minute. The Chelsea defender was first to reach the ball and as he attempted to kick it, it ricocheted up onto Kovačić’s arm before going out of play. Referee Anthony Taylor initially called it a corner, but VAR was later called to check the incident. After a thorough check, the VAR officials backed Taylor’s decision, and Chelsea’s corner stood.

Per the new handball rule, not every touch of a player’s arm or hand will necessarily be considered an offence. Defenders can also play without having to keep their arms behind their backs. If a player’s arm is in a justifiable position, referees will not call a penalty should the ball hit them via a deflection, if they are falling, or if they are close to the ball. The new rule was implemented after several Premier League clubs raised concerns about the excessive number of handballs being called by officials in matches and argued that the existing rule was too strict last season.

“No penalty. I’m all for the new interpretation – it’s so close and his arms are going towards his body,” was former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher’s assessment. “It does hit him, there’s no doubt, but this year we’re going to see a lot less penalties given. When we did the briefing last week – which I was on – it was explained that, under the new guidance, it’s no penalty. I’m more comfortable with that interpretation.”

Was Cash’s challenge on Soucek really a penalty?

West Ham were awarded a penalty in the 35th minute when Matty Cash brought down Tomás Soucek. Although Cash got a toe to the ball, the referee pointed to the spot and after a VAR check the penalty stood. Lucas Paquetá then scored from the spot to equalise for West Ham.

Penalty decisions made on the field that wouldn’t be given through VAR are always controversial and often considered soft by fans. Many felt this was an example of a “higher bar” being set, as Cash did make contact with the ball.

The VAR felt that despite Cash’s touch on the ball, it wasn’t enough to overturn the on-field decision, as he still had to reach around Soucek before bringing him down. Howard Webb, the head of PGMOL, cited similar penalties from the previous season where the VAR didn’t intervene and insisted that, while open to debate, they shouldn’t be considered clear and obvious errors. This decision falls into the same category – not a higher standard, just insufficient reason to overturn the on-field decision.

“Cash touched the ball, there’s no doubt about that. Does touching the ball negate a foul? No,” Gallagher said. “I do know a lot of people think this isn’t a foul. That’s why you have to stick with the referee’s call because it’s so tight.”

Were Everton hard done by with penalty overturn?

Referee Simon Hooper pointed to the penalty spot in the 47th minute when Lewis Dunk made contact with Dominic Calvert-Lewin while sliding. However, the VAR, Darren England, sent Hooper to the monitor to review the incident, and it was subsequently overturned.

Toffees head coach Sean Dyche was unhappy after the game. He referred to there being a “very high bar” this season. Much of the coverage has talked about a “higher bar,” yet that isn’t the case. Perhaps the message got mixed up in the move to use “referee’s call” over “clear and obvious,” and the drive to make VAR quicker and more efficient. Both are part of the six-point plan to improve VAR.

Could Schär have stayed on?

Fabián Schär was shown a red card by referee Craig Pawson in the 28th minute after a clash with Ben Brereton Díaz. As the two players faced off, the Newcastle United defender was judged to have moved his head into Brereton Díaz’s and was dismissed for violent conduct. Once the VAR, Chris Kavanagh, identified that Schär directed his head into the opponent’s, there was no likelihood of VAR intervention.

Brereton Díaz’s actions can be questioned, as the Southampton player theatrically threw himself to the ground. He was booked for his part in the tussle but would not receive another caution for simulation after the opponent had been sent off.

Did Savinho get away with it on debut?

In the 33rd minute, Manchester City winger Savinho, making his Premier League debut for the champions after joining this summer, collided with Chelsea skipper Enzo Fernández, who went down in the City box, but referee Anthony Taylor wasn’t interested. VAR had a quick look but declined to intervene, confirming the referee’s on-field decision.