The video assistant referee causes controversy every week in the Premier League, but how are decisions made and are they correct?
This season, we take a look at the major incidents to examine and explain the process both in terms of the VAR protocol and the laws of the game.
All screenshots photo credit: NBC
Andy Davies (@andydaviesref) is a former Select Group referee, with over 12 seasons on the elite list, working across the Premier League and Championship. With extensive experience at the elite level, he has operated within the VAR space in the Premier League and offers a unique insight into the processes, rationale and protocols that are delivered on a Premier League matchday.
Referee: Andrew Madley
VAR: James Bell
Incident: Goal scored by Forest defender Murillo; VAR check for possible offside.
Time: 33 minutes
What happened: Murillo scored Nottingham Forest’s opening goal at Anfield, with Dan Ndoye stood in an offside position in the goal area, prompting a VAR check for a possible disallowed goal due to the impact on an opponent.
Tight margins 😬 pic.twitter.com/nucl132lSA
— CBS Sports Golazo ⚽️ (@CBSSportsGolazo) November 22, 2025
NOTTINGHAM FOREST SILENCE ANFIELD WITH AN OPENER. 😳 pic.twitter.com/WzXHWFLObJ
— NBC Sports Soccer (@NBCSportsSoccer) November 22, 2025
VAR decision: The referee’s on-field decision to allow the goal was checked and confirmed by the VAR and deemed that Forest attacker Ndoye was not in the line of vision of Liverpool goalkeeper Alisson Becker, nor did he make an action that impacted his opponent.
VAR review: The on-field communication between Madley and his assistant was key in this review. The communication clearly explained that Ndoye was, despite being stood in an offside position, not in Alisson’s line of vision, nor did he make an obvious action that impacted his opponent.
Bell’s responsibility as the VAR is to run a process to identify that this was factually correct, and also to confirm that no other offences were committed by the attacking team that met the threshold for a possible infringement and review. He was comfortable with the on-field interpretation.
Verdict: Football never fails to produce key moments to compare and this was an interesting situation for both the on-field and VAR team, considering a similar incident involving Liverpool vs. Manchester City earlier this month.
Ultimately, the correct outcome has, in my opinion, been reached in this situation. Reflection, re-aligned messaging and discussions around game expectation have clearly taken place at PGMOL towers since the City game, however it is worth noting the circumstances and dynamics are slightly different in this example given the nature of Ndoye’s body movement, or lack of, compared to Andy Robertson.
In my VAR review after the City vs. Liverpool game, I discussed how clubs could attempt to take advantage in set-piece situations by designing areas for attacking players to stand in an offside position with the intention of disrupting the goalkeeper enough to find that marginal gain…
Have Forest created such a situation here? My instinct would tell me yes.
Incident: Nottingham Forest have a goal disallowed for a handball offence by Igor Jesus.
Time: 35 minutes
What happened: Nottingham Forest‘s Igor Jesus and Liverpool defender Ibrahima Konaté challenged for the ball in the Liverpool penalty area. Konaté, while going to ground, played the ball against Jesus’ body, and the striker subsequently scored. However, the referee felt that the ball had struck the arm of Jesus directly before he placed it past Liverpool keeper Alisson Becker and subsequently disallowed the goal.
Nottingham Forest thought they had a second against Liverpool-but the goal is DISALLOWED for handball. 👀 pic.twitter.com/lhKBqnKjxk
— NBC Sports Soccer (@NBCSportsSoccer) November 22, 2025
VAR decision: Having viewed the footage, the VAR confirmed the on-field decision and agreed with Madley’s original decision. He disallowed the goal for an accidental handball prior to player scoring.
VAR review: The VAR’s starting position in this review is, as always, the on-field decision. For Bell to intervene and recommend an on-field review, he would need to produce definitive evidence that the ball did not strike the arm of Jesus and that Madley had made a clear error with his decision.
Verdict: This decision will create a level of debate, and certainly Forest will feel slightly unfortunate that this decision has gone against them.
However, the Law states: It is an offence if a player scores in the opponents’ goal;
– Directly from their hand / arm, even if accidental
– Immediately after the ball has touched their hand /arm, even if accidental.
The on-field decision from Madley was a brave one, and given his on-field position (looking around a Liverpool defender at the point the ball struck the upper body of Jesus), he would have been working off less than 100% certainty.
However, the trajectory of the ball and the body shape of Jesus would have given him strong clues that the ball was likely to have struck the upper arm of the Forest player and he trusted his gut instinct.
From a VAR perspective, Bell would have had limited footage to work with, and there was certainly no evidence to disagree with Madley’s decision.
Neutral fans (and Forest fans) will be disappointed that this goal was disallowed due the accidental nature of the incident, but goals can’t be scored when a ball has been played by the hand or arm, even when accidental. Ultimately it may feel like an unfair outcome, but the Law says otherwise.
