Should Arsenal's penalty have been overturned? Plus, Man United's spot-kick escape

"After each weekend we take a look at the major incidents, to examine and explain the process both in terms of VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game. In this week's VAR Review: Should Arsenal's penalty against West Ham have been cancelled? What happened with Sunderland's overturned spot kick at Manchester United? And why didn't Alexander Isak win a penalty for Liverpool at Chelsea?"

"The referee and the VAR are looking for the point of contact that causes the foul. So, it is possible for contact to begin outside the area, and the foul happen inside. This isn't a foul continuing into the area, it's the foul itself happening within it. It's different to holding, which is the only offence which can start outside the box, continue into it, and be a penalty."

"Possible penalty overturn: Position of foul by Diouf on Timber What happened: Arsenal were awarded a penalty in the 67th minute when Jurriën Timber raced onto a pass and was brought down on the edge of the area by El Hadji Malick Diouf. Referee John Brooks pointed to the spot, and it was checked by the VAR, Michael Oliver. VAR decision: Penalty stands, scored by Bukayo Saka."

VAR continues to generate controversy and is reviewed weekly against VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game. Key incidents include Arsenal's penalty against West Ham, Sunderland's overturned spot kick at Manchester United, and Alexander Isak's non-awarded penalty at Chelsea. Arsenal's 67th-minute penalty arose when Jurriën Timber was brought down by El Hadji Malick Diouf; the referee awarded a spot kick and the VAR checked the incident. The core issue was the exact point of contact, because a contact that begins outside the area can be judged to create a foul inside the area. A December 2020 case between Southampton and Brighton is cited as precedent where initial outside contact was judged to be a foul inside.

Read at ESPN.com