Kai Havertz's disallowed goal for Arsenal against Aston Villa was a "really good decision", according to PGMOL chief Howard Webb.
Article continues below
Article continues below
Article continues below
Havertz saw his goal disallowedArsenal went down 1-0 to VillaWebb stands firmly behind VAR's decisionWHAT HAPPENED?
Havertz appeared to have scored a late equaliser against Unai Emery's side only for the goal to be ruled out due to a handball which saw Arsenal go down by a slender 1-0 margin at Villa Park. Despite a lengthy VAR check, the goal stood cancelled which left the German midfielder furious as he could have done little to prevent his arm from hitting the ball from very close range.
AdvertisementWHAT WEBB SAID ABOUT THE DECISION
Webb clarified the situation on the Match Officials: Mic'd Up episode on Sky Sports while addressing the frustration of Arsenal fans: "The law states that any contact with an attacker’s hand or arm – even accidental – which then leads to a goal being scored immediately has to be penalised. And this is actually a really good on-field decision by the referee, Jarred Gillett, in that respect. The law requires him to penalise when he sees that contact on Kai Havertz’s arm.
"It’s not intentional, but it still has to be penalised. I think the idea was that if it comes off the arm, it can’t be a fair goal – that was the reason why this law came in. But we see this kind of situation leading to a goal disallowed when it hits Havertz’s arm and yet a few seconds earlier, it hits Matty Cash’s arm as well – equally accidentally – but he doesn’t get penalised.
"He can’t be penalised, because he’s got to commit a different offence as a defender – he’s got to make himself unnaturally bigger or deliberately handle the ball. He does none of those, so it’s correct not to penalise, but we’re working with a different threshold for the attacker. It hits Havertz’s hand, and we have to disallow the goal in this circumstance."
Getty ImagesTHE BIGGER PICTURE
Despite the non-intentional nature of the contact, Webb emphasised that it still had to be penalised as Havertz got the last touch.
"This law has been in place for, I think, about five years now. It was decided by the International FA Board [IFAB], through their consultation, that goals that are scored off the arm are not fair, and therefore this law came in," he said.
"The laws are always under review, maybe it will change, but in this circumstance, the referee did absolutely the right thing. And then once the on-field decision has been given as a disallowed goal, then the VAR checks the footage, just to make sure the referee has not mistakenly seen a contact on the arm. In that case, the goal should stand, if it’s only hit the body.
"But of course, the VAR has to check if there’s clear evidence that the ball did not hit the hand to intervene. If it’s not conclusive, they’ll just leave this on-field decision alone. But actually, when you see the VAR’s process, they do get to the point where they see an angle that shows the contact on Havertz’s arm.
"Interestingly, if it had been Nketiah who had scored the goal, it would have stood, because it only relates to the goalscorer – in this case, Havertz, who made contact with the arm. It didn’t hit Nketiah’s arm – if he pokes it in, it’s a goal, because everything before that was all accidental."
WHAT WEBB SAID ABOUT VAR
VAR has been controversy's favourite child for dishing out several contentious decisions but Webb maintained that the technology acts as a "safety net" in case of human errors.
"He [Referee Jarred Gillett]’s got a clean view of it, what, from 25 yards out," he said.
"He does [make a good decision in real time]. And we’re always encouraging the officials, even with the existence of VAR, to be prepared to make positive, accurate, on-field calls. We’ve said for a long time, good officiating starts on the field of play.
"VAR is not there to referee the game – it’s there as a safety net for clear errors. Jarred sees this situation clearly from that position and penalises, and is right to do so – credit to him for doing that."