The Premier League season is just past the halfway point, and VAR controversy has never been far away. But which of the contentious decisions have truly been controversial? And when have they fallen under the label “referee’s call”?
ESPN can reveal the official list of VAR errors as logged by the Premier League’s Key Match Incidents (KMI) Panel across the first 19 rounds, which ran through the matches played Dec. 29-Jan. 1. The KMI Panel has not yet reported on Round 20, Jan. 4-6.
We’ll show each time if it was decided the VAR made an error in stepping in, or if it failed to intervene to fix a clear error, and tell you exactly what the KMI Panel said.
The list includes incidents the panel believed were mistakes by the referee, but which didn’t reach the threshold for video review.
The panel also makes judgements on second yellow cards to identify incorrect or missed red cards.
For the first time, ESPN brings the full breakdown of the panel’s assessments and why it reached those verdicts.
What is the KMI Panel?
It was set up by the Premier League three years ago to give an arm’s length assessment of all key match incidents. It includes penalties, red cards, offsides and anything else that would come under the jurisdiction of the referee and could have an impact on the game.
Prior to 2022, it was Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL), the organisation in charge of refereeing, that would collate the stats. Clubs, of course, would argue that the figures were skewed in favour of the officials, and so the KMI Panel was born.
It features five members: three former players and/or coaches, one representative for the Premier League, and one for PGMOL. Each member has one vote across the KMIs in two categories: the referee’s original decision, and whether the VAR should intervene. A simple majority is required for right or wrong.
While KMI Panel results alone won’t change the way games are officiated, the feedback can inform clubs and officials on what should be happening and help manage expectations.
The panel makes judgements based upon the laws of the game, general interpretation in the Premier League and how the league wants VAR to operate. That means some decisions that fans, and indeed clubs, might feel aggrieved about won’t make the list of errors. That’s because, subjectively, most incidents in football could be argued either way.
There will be outcomes PGMOL disagrees with, too. For instance, referees’ chief Howard Webb is on record that Christian Nørgaard‘s VAR red card at Everton was the correct call, but the KMI Panel voted that it was an error. There will be other decisions which are deemed as correct on-field, which PGMOL believes should really have been dealt with differently — for instance, Webb says Wilfred Ndidi should have received a red card against Chelsea.
VAR errors are vastly reduced this season, with 10 after 19 games compared with 20 a year earlier. And even with the introduction of “referee’s call,” the VAR stats haven’t been transferred to on-field errors, which are also down.
The Premier League chooses not to publicize the results of the KMI Panel, and indeed earlier this season began delaying releasing the information to club by seven days until after the next round of fixtures. ESPN can now reveal the full details.
Links to a video clip of the incident have been included where available.
What the stats tell us
If bare numbers were the only barometer, then they’d suggest that VAR has been markedly better this season in the Premier League. Twice as good, or half as bad, depending on your viewpoint…
Yet the VAR stats tell only part of the story, because fans and clubs continue to complain about the general standard of refereeing — and that’s not something that will be reflected in these numbers.
It’s impossible to lose all contentious incidents because football is made up largely of those subjective laws and contrasting opinions, which will be hugely influenced if you have skin in the game. You need only to check out the quotes of opposing managers on controversial situations.
Persuading supporters that things are getting better when presented with the figures is a tough task, especially as good outcomes don’t get any column inches. But the numbers say that VAR errors are down 50% this season, while “referee’s call” on-field mistakes have fallen by around a third.
Across VAR mistakes, it’s Brentford, Manchester United and West Ham United, with two each, who have suffered the most. The Hammers can’t complain much, however, as they were given an incorrect 92nd-minute penalty against Man United that resulted in a 2-1 win.
A stoppage-time, result-changing error robbed AFC Bournemouth of two points when a winning goal against Newcastle United was disallowed for a handball. Crystal Palace might feel aggrieved, too, as Aston Villa should have received a red card in the 65th minute when the Eagles led 2-1.
Across all types of errors, Villa have the worst net result, with Everton and Leicester City the beneficiaries most often.
Incorrect VAR interventions
These are when the VAR wrongly sent the referee to the monitor to change the original on-field decision.
This season there have been three mistakes, the same number as at this stage in the 2023-24 campaign.
1. Bournemouth 1-1 Newcastle, Aug. 25
Dango Ouattara goal disallowed for handball (’90+2)
KMI Panel referee vote: 5-0
KMI Panel VAR vote: 0-5
AFC Bournemouth scored what would have been a late winner, but the VAR stepped in to disallow it for handball by the goal scorer. (Watch here)
What the KMI Panel said: “The panel were unanimous in agreeing that the goal was correctly awarded on-field, and that there was no conclusive evidence readily available of an accidental handball by the attacker, that would be required for the VAR to intervene.”
2. West Ham 2-1 Man United, Oct. 27
Penalty awarded for a foul by Matthijs de Ligt on Danny Ings (’90+2)
KMI Panel referee vote: 5-0
KMI Panel VAR vote: 0-5
The VAR advised that West Ham should be given a spot kick in added time. It was scored by Jarrod Bowen, which earned the home side a 2-1 win. Manager Erik ten Hag was sacked the following morning. (Watch here)
What the KMI Panel said: “A collision between two players challenging for a loose ball, the referee is in a great position and decides to play on. The panel were unanimous in their support of the referee’s original call of no penalty.”
3. Everton 0-0 Brentford, Nov. 23
Christian Nørgaard sent off for serious foul play (’39)
KMI Panel referee vote: 3-2
KMI Panel VAR vote: 2-3
The referee didn’t give a free kick against the Brentford captain after he made contact with a knee of goalkeeper Jordan Pickford when sliding to meet a cross. The VAR sent him to the monitor and advised a red card. The red card was overturned on appeal. (Watch here)
What the KMI Panel said: “The panel were split (3:2), with the majority deeming the on-field decision correct as ‘both players are committed to normal footballing actions. Norgaard does make high contact but he bends his knee and extracts his leg, lowering the force and likelihood of endangering the player.’ Two panellists deemed the on-field decision incorrect and supported the VAR intervention as ‘whilst this was a challenge for the ball, there was a high, full and forceful contact with the studs on the opponent’s knee, which endangers the safety of the opponent.'”
Missed VAR interventions
Last season, this was the area that caused referees so much trouble. At the halfway stage of 2023-24, the KMI Panel had identified 17 missed interventions — times when the referee’s on-field decision should have been changed. This season, there has been a marked improvement with only seven errors.
NB: If a contentious incident hasn’t been listed in this area, such as William Saliba‘s VAR red card for Arsenal at AFC Bournemouth, it is logged as correct.
1. Man United 0-3 Tottenham, Sept. 29
Serious foul play, red card to Bruno Fernandes (’41)
KMI Panel referee vote: 0-5
KMI Panel VAR vote: 0-5
Man United trailed 1-0 when captain Fernandes was sent off after he made a challenge on James Maddison in which he led with his studs. The VAR didn’t intervene to downgrade the card to a yellow. The red card was overturned after an appeal to the FA. (Watch here)
What the KMI Panel said: “Fernandes is reaching, the contact is high but certainly not excessive force or endangering the safety. The evidence is also there for a VAR intervention.”
2. Aston Villa 2-2 Crystal Palace, Nov. 23
DOGSO, red card not given to Ian Maatsen (’65)
KMI Panel referee vote: 1-4
KMI Panel VAR vote: 2-3
Ismaïla Sarr was through on goal when pulled down by Aston Villa defender Maatsen. The referee and the VAR felt there was a covering player and cautioned Maatsen. Palace led 2-1 at the time and the game would end 2-2.
What the KMI Panel said: “Sarr is in control, touches the ball towards the goal and would have had an obvious opportunity to have a shot on goal. The panel (3:2) felt the VAR should have intervened for a clear and obvious error.”
3. Everton 4-0 Wolves, Dec. 4
Abdoulaye Doucouré offside offence on goal (’72)
KMI Panel referee vote: 1-4
KMI Panel VAR vote: 1-4
Everton had already seen one goal disallowed by the VAR in the 16th minute for the exact same offside offence, blocking an opponent by Orel Mangala. When Doucouré did the same thing in the 72nd minute, which led to Craig Dawson scoring an own goal to put Everton 4-0 up, there was no intervention. (Watch here)
What the KMI Panel said: “The offside attacker’s actions clearly impact the defender’s ability to challenge for or play the ball. The panel concluded that both the on-field decision (4:1) and the VAR’s decision not to intervene (4:1) was incorrect.”
4. Nottingham Forest 2-1 Aston Villa, Dec. 14
Penalty not awarded. Foul by Elliot Anderson (’34)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 2-3
Another marginal vote, but the majority of the KMI Panel felt that the holding offence by Anderson on Morgan Rogers just crossed the threshold for a VAR penalty. However, it also said that a pitchside monitor review would have enabled the referee to assess earlier holding by Rogers, which may have ruled out the possibility of a penalty (as happened in Brentford vs. Brighton last season.) (Watch here)
What the KMI Panel said: “Anderson grabs hold of Rogers outside of the area but this continues inside. The holding offence is clear. VAR should have intervened (3:2), noting that a VAR intervention would have allowed the referee to also review whether there was an initial foul by Rogers on Anderson.”
5. West Ham 1-1 Brighton, Dec. 21
Serious foul play, red card not given to Pervis Estupiñán (’84)
KMI Panel referee vote: 1-4
KMI Panel VAR vote: 1-4
Estupiñán was cautioned for a foul on Max Kilman, with the score 1-1, and the VAR elected against a review for a red card.
What the KMI Panel said: “The action of Estupiñán has speed, force, intensity and endangers the safety of the opponent. The panel felt that the VAR should have recommended an on field review (4:1).”
6. Brighton 0-0 Brentford, Dec. 27
Violent conduct, red card not given to João Pedro (’75)
KMI Panel referee vote: 0-5
KMI Panel VAR vote: 0-5
Pedro was pulled back by Yehor Yarmoliuk, then the Brighton & Hove Albion forward threw his elbow back. Pedro didn’t make contact, but it was done so with great force — yet the VAR decided this wasn’t sufficient for a red card for violent conduct. (Watch here)
What the KMI Panel said: “A clear attempt to strike Yarmoliuk by Pedro. No contact is needed as per the Laws of the Game for this clear action to result in a red card for violent conduct. There is no place in football for actions like this.”
7. West Ham 0-5 Liverpool, Dec. 29
Penalty not awarded. Foul by Alexis Mac Allister (’35)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 2-3
The most perplexing result, concerning an off-the-ball tussle between Carlos Soler and Mac Allister, when West Ham United trailed 1-0. Mohammed Kudus delivered a cross from the right, which was diverted in the arms of goalkeeper Alphonse Areola by Lucas Paquetá at the near post. In the centre of the box, Soler (who had no chance of challenging for the ball) went down under pressure from Mac Allister, with both referee and VAR allowing play to continue. Far clearer examples of holding offences haven’t been logged as mistakes. (Watch here)
The “referee’s call” incident involving Yehor Yarmoliuk on Marc Cucurella is a clearer offence than this.
What the KMI Panel said: “The panel were split (3:2) with the majority deeming the on-field decision incorrect as ‘he turns his back on the ball, his only motivation is to impede the attacker and throws him to the floor.’ The opposing view was that ‘there’s initial engagement from both players and it doesn’t have a clear impact on play given the flight of the ball.’ The majority supported a VAR review as ‘the flight of the ball, and lack of material impact, doesn’t negate the fact Mac Allister has clearly fouled his opponent.'”
“Referee’s Call”
The second category is “referee’s call,” a term which was introduced at the start of the season to effectively to replace “clear and obvious.”
It’s supposed to give a greater understanding that the on-field decision carries most weight.
It means there are some decisions judged to be incorrect on the field which do not reach the threshold for a VAR review.
So far this season 12 have been logged, compared to 18 at the same stage in 2023-24 — another marked improvement.
Here, in short, are those contentious situations.
NB: If an incident hasn’t been listed in this area, such as Manchester United‘s claim for a penalty vs. Manchester City for a challenge by Rúben Dias on Rasmus Højlund, it is logged as correct on field and through VAR.
When a penalty should have been awarded, but wasn’t (8)
1. Man City 4-1 Ipswich Town, Aug 24
Challenge by Savinho on Leif Davis (’42)
KMI Panel referee vote: 0-5
KMI Panel VAR vote: 3-2
Ipswich were trialing 3-1 when Davis was brought down by Savinho.
What the KMI Panel said: “The referee is in a great position, there is clear contact, Davis is in control of the ball and is taken out. However, there was a split on VAR intervention (3:2) with the majority agreeing that the VAR was correct to leave the decision with the referee’s call as the player had started to go to ground before the contact.”
2. West Ham 0-3 Chelsea, Sept. 21
Challenge by Wesley Fofana on Crysencio Summerville (’28)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 4-1
West Ham were two goals down when the penalty incident occurred.
What the KMI Panel said: “This was a split vote, 3:2, with the majority believing that a penalty should have been awarded onfield. Summerville’s wrist is held as he gets away from Fofana, and this impacts his progress towards the ball. The panel were split on VAR intervention, 4:1, with the majority supporting the referee’s call of no penalty.” (Watch here)
3. Southampton 2-3 Leicester, Oct. 19
Challenge by Jordan Ayew on Paul Onuachu (’69)
KMI Panel referee vote: 1-4
KMI Panel VAR vote: 3-2
Southampton led 2-1 at the time of the penalty incident. They went on to lose 3-2 with a VAR penalty and red card giving Leicester their second goal.
What the KMI Panel said: “It’s a non-footballing action of holding his shirt for a sustained time period. The majority (3:2) supported the VAR’s decision to not intervene as ‘it should remain the referee’s call due to its subjectivity and the lack of clear impact.'” (Watch here)
4. Bournemouth 2-0 Arsenal, Oct. 19
Challenge by Thomas Partey on Marcos Senesi (’76)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 4-1
Bournemouth led 1-0 when Partey fouled Senesi, but went on to win 2-0 through a penalty which was awarded shortly afterward.
What the KMI Panel said: “Partey is not initially competing for the ball and when he puts his arms round Senesi he impacts the attacker’s ability to play the ball. The majority (4:1) supported the VAR’s decision to not intervene as ‘it’s not clearly and obviously wrong, and therefore should remain the referee’s call.'”
5. Ipswich 1-1 Leicester, Nov. 2
Challenge by Fatawu Issahaku on Conor Chaplin (’76)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 5-0
Ipswich led 1-0 when the incident happened and conceded a stoppage-time equaliser.
What the KMI Panel said: “Chaplin has control of the ball, shifts it to the side and Fatawu clearly collides with the attacker and doesn’t win the ball. The panel unanimously supported the no VAR intervention and agreed the decision should remain the referee’s call.” (Watch here)
6. Newcastle 0-2 West Ham, Nov. 25
Challenge by Konstantinos Mavropanos on Callum Wilson (’72)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 4-1
West Ham were already 2-0 up at the time of the possible penalty.
What the KMI Panel said: “The defender is wrong side, has his arms on Wilson and affects his ability to jump and head the ball. The VAR’s decision to not intervene was supported (4:1), with the majority agreeing this decision should remain the referee’s call.”
7. Chelsea 2-1 Brentford, Dec. 15
Challenge by Yehor Yarmoliuk on Marc Cucurella (’22)
KMI Panel referee vote: 1-4
KMI Panel VAR vote: 3-2
The game was goalless, but Chelsea went on to win anyway.
What the KMI Panel said: “Yarmoliuk was not looking at the ball and manoeuvred Cucurella away from the ball. It has no impact on play but this is an extreme non-footballing action and should result in a penalty. However, the panel didn’t feel that this was a clear and obvious error for a VAR intervention.”
8. Everton 0-0 Chelsea, Dec. 22
Challenge by Jordan Pickford on Malo Gusto (’31)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 5-0
What the KMI Panel said: “It’s a very high-risk challenge by Pickford. There’s a lot of force with an outstretched leg. The panel did not feel that this was a clear and obvious error for a VAR intervention (5:0).” (Watch here.)
Penalty awarded that shouldn’t have been (1)
1. West Ham 1-2 Aston Villa, Aug. 17
Challenge by Matty Cash on Tomás Soucek (’35)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 4-1
Villa led 1-0 at the time, but went on to win anyway.
What the KMI Panel said: “Cash plays the ball first which is then followed by a tangle of legs. The majority (4:1) supported the VAR’s decision to not intervene as ‘this is a good example of where the referee’s call stands.'” (Watch here)
Red card not shown that should have been (2)
1. Leicester 1-2 Chelsea, Nov. 23
Serious foul play challenge by Wilfred Ndidi on Cole Palmer (’22)
KMI Panel referee vote: 2-3
KMI Panel VAR vote: 4-1
Chelsea were already a goal to the good and went on to secure the three points.
What the KMI Panel said: “He lunges and makes impactful contact down the back of the opponent’s Achilles. However, the VAR’s decision to not intervene was supported (4:1) with the panel commenting ‘this decision should remain the referee’s call as he is in the best position to determine the intensity of the incident.'”
2. Aston Villa 3-2 Brentford, Dec. 4
DOGSO challenge by Ethan Pinnock on Ollie Watkins (’25)
KMI Panel referee vote: 1-4
KMI Panel VAR vote: 3-2
Villa went two goals up from the penalty, which should have seen Pinnock, who was booked by the referee, sent off.
What the KMI Panel said: “It’s a non-footballing action of holding his shirt for a sustained time period. The majority (3:2) supported the VAR’s decision to not intervene as ‘it should remain the referee’s call due to its subjectivity and the lack of clear impact.'” (Watch here)
Goal disallowed that shouldn’t have been (1)
1. Brighton 1-1 Southampton, Nov. 29
Adam Armstrong offside — but not impacting on play (’67)
KMI Panel referee vote: 0-5
KMI Panel VAR vote: 5-0
The goal would have given Southampton a 2-1 lead with 23 minutes to play, in a game which finished 1-1.
What the KMI Panel said: “Armstrong does attempt to flick/play the ball which is close to him before Cameron Archer scores, with the referee’s call being that this had an impact on an opponent. The panel deemed that on balance Armstrong’s action did not impact the goalkeeper. However, VAR was correct not to intervene as the readily available footage did not provide clear evidence that the referee’s call was a clear and obvious error.” (Watch here)
Second yellow cards
The KMI Panel also looks at challenges made by players who could have received a second booking.
It also considers challenges made by players who are on a yellow and could have been sent off.
After 19 rounds of the 2023-24 season, 11 errors had been logged; this campaign has seen eight.
The VAR is unable to intervene on an incorrect yellow card, even if it has led to a red card.
NB: If a contentious incident hasn’t been listed in this area, such as for Arsenal’s Declan Rice and Leandro Trossard, it is logged as correct.
Incorrect second yellow cards (5)
Brighton 2-2 Nottingham Forest, Sept. 22
Morgan Gibbs-White (’82)
Fulham 1-3 Aston Villa, Oct. 19
Jaden Philogene (’90+3)
Ipswich 1-1 Leicester, Nov. 2
Kalvin Phillips (’77)
Bournemouth 1-2 Brighton, Nov. 23
Carlos Baleba (’59)
Crystal Palace 2-2 Man City, Dec. 7
Rico Lewis (’84)
Missed second yellow cards (3)
Ipswich 2-2 Aston Villa, Sept. 29
Sam Morsy (’70)
Tottenham 1-1 Fulham, Dec. 1
Sasa Lukic (’60)
Everton 0-2 Nottingham Forest, Dec. 29
James Tarkowski (’45)