VAR review: Why Arsenal should have had a penalty vs. Everton

"The VAR had to consider if replays showed a different story to the detail described by the referee Madley or his rationale as to why a penalty was not awarded on field. Madley apparently didn't deem the contact by Keane sufficient enough to stop Havertz in his tracks, he described the level of contact as minimal and not impactful on the Arsenal attacker's ability to continue his run and possible shot on goal."

"It's difficult to understand the non-intervention by VAR in this situation as the contact by Keane, whilst not at a high level, was impactful on Havertz's ability to progress and have a shot at goal. By stepping on the Achilles of Havertz, who was ahead of the defender, consideration of the level of contact becomes crucial."

VAR operates in the Premier League by reviewing major incidents to determine if referee decisions align with the Laws of the Game. Former elite referee Andy Davies provides expert analysis of VAR protocols and decision-making processes. In examining a specific incident where Arsenal appealed for a penalty after Michael Keane's contact with Kai Havertz, the on-field referee deemed contact minimal and VAR confirmed this decision. However, analysis suggests the contact, while not severe, was impactful enough to affect Havertz's ability to continue his run and attempt a shot. VAR's role involves assessing whether replays reveal different information than the referee's initial rationale, determining if contact levels warrant penalty awards under the Laws of the Game.

Read at ESPN.com