Trending topics:
Premier League

Why did VAR not give Chelsea penalty vs West Ham despite Tomas Soucek's apparent handball?

Saturday's game, West Ham vs Chelseawas tense until the very end because VAR did not give the visitors a penalty kick.After Conor Callagher's strike seemed to be handled by Tomas Soucek, Chelsea requested a penalty kick, but VAR ultimately ruled against the Blues.

Published by

By martina alcheva

Kepa Arrizabalaga of Chelsea and referee Craig Pawson
© Julian Finney/Getty ImagesKepa Arrizabalaga of Chelsea and referee Craig Pawson

On Saturday, West Hamtied Chelseafor the third time in a row in the Premier League, this time with a score of 1-1. The opening 20 minutes of the game at London Stadium saw the Blues playing like a real squad that has really hit the jackpot during the winter transfer window,

Joao Felix not only scored a wonderful goal but also performed well as the kind of elusive, creative playmaker that every team dreams of having. It was also clear that Enzo Fernandez had the kind of drive and ability to orchestrate plays that led his sideto pay the highest-ever British transfer fees to get his services. Meanwhile,Mykhailo Mudryk‘sprice tag was evident all over the field.

After West Ham’s equalizer, though, the visitors’ momentum died and their stars sank into obscurity.They came into the game 10 points behind fourth-place Newcastle and a point against a relegation-threatened club doesn’t help their cause.

Advertisement

Why weren’tChelsea awarded penalty kick forhandball by Tomas Soucek?

When Chelsea weren’t awarded a penalty for what seemed to be a handball by Tomas Soucek in the dying seconds of the game, the decision sparked a massive uproar. The ball definitely hit Soucek’s arm as he dropped to the ground, blocking Conor Gallagher’s effort from the outside of the box in the 89th minute, and Lukasz Fabianski gathered it.

Advertisement

As a result of the Blues’ objections, referee Craig Pawson consulted the video assistant referee but ultimately decided not to award a penalty.In his role atBT Sports, former Premier League official Peter Walton thought a penalty should have been given but clarified why VAR did not take action.

“The law is quite clear. The law says about making that area unnaturally bigger. The VAR clearly thinks the arm was in a natural position… going down to break his fall. If you look at it closely, you see the ball is past his knee and then the arm is there. For me, that is a deliberate act and I am disappointed the VAR did not give the referee an opportunity to have a second look at it.

Advertisement

“In the law, you could almost defend the player by saying his arm was in a natural position. But really, football as a community would want that given as a penalty kick. As a former Premier League referee, I think that was the wrong decision today and should have been a penalty”,Waltonsaid.

ALSO READ

Chiefs at risk of losing a key player in Patrick Mahomes' offense
NFL

Chiefs at risk of losing a key player in Patrick Mahomes' offense

Spurs' Victor Wembanyama reflects on 50-point game and issues bold warning to NBA rivals
NBA

Spurs' Victor Wembanyama reflects on 50-point game and issues bold warning to NBA rivals

Bo Nix sends message to Broncos' center after Chiefs' FG block
NFL

Bo Nix sends message to Broncos' center after Chiefs' FG block

NBA News: Paul Pierce downplays Stephen Curry's impact, draws comparison to Clippers star
NBA

NBA News: Paul Pierce downplays Stephen Curry's impact, draws comparison to Clippers star

Better Collective Logo