Controversial Calls Unveiled: Dermot Gallagher Debates Hot Topics from Opening Weekend of New Premier League Season

'Jackson handball right not to be given'

Liverpool's Controversial Penalty Claim Against Chelsea

Liverpool had a glimmer of hope for a penalty during their clash against Chelsea on Sunday. The incident occurred when the ball made contact with Nicolas Jackson's hand after a corner. Despite the team's appeal, VAR ultimately ruled against the penalty call. Still, the question lingers: Could the decision have been different?

Dermot states, "It is not a penalty! Initially, I believed it was, but upon further consideration, I have concluded otherwise. The player attempted to reach the ball, and then Luis Diaz quickly redirected it, leaving no time for the player to avoid contact. Had the ball not touched [Diaz], it would have been a penalty."

Stephen Warnock: "To gain momentum while jumping, it is essential to utilize your arms. Initially, I believed it could be a penalty, and would it have surprised me if it had been awarded? Not at all. Nevertheless, I comprehend the justification for the decision to not grant it."

Sue Smith: "I am relieved that it was not awarded. I believe it was the correct decision."

'Right not to punish Rice against Forest'

INCIDENT: Nottingham Forest manager Steve Cooper expressed his astonishment at the lack of VAR intervention by referee Michael Oliver regarding a potential handball committed by Arsenal midfielder Declan Rice. Is his objection valid?

DERMOT SAYS: "NO PENALTY!

After examining the situation, they came to the conclusion that it wasn't permissible. Just like the Jackson incident, the issue lies with the distance. Undoubtedly, it made contact with him, but were his arms in the correct position? Did he make any motion towards the ball? The answer is no. No offence intended.

According to Stephen Warnock, "Utilizing my arms for leverage is necessary. It's a fundamental aspect of the game, a natural football movement. And if the ball happens to hit my arm in that particular position, there isn't much I can do about it."

'Dunk handball should not have been a penalty'

INCIDENT: In Luton's 4-1 defeat at Brighton, they were awarded a penalty for a handball against Lewis Dunk. What are your thoughts on this?

DERMOT SAYS: "WRONG DECISION!

"It would be wiser not to award it. Upon reviewing this, referee David Coote may ponder: 'Perhaps I blew the whistle too hastily and didn't allow myself adequate time for consideration.'

"The ball has indeed made contact with the arm, but the player was attempting to block it. Will the VAR intervene? The challenge lies in the fact that it did hit his arm, the referee has already made the call on the pitch, which somewhat restricts the involvement of VAR."

Stephen Warnock: "Agreed. Not a penalty."

Sue Smith: "Yep, not a penalty."

'Everton goal right to be ruled out - but not for foul on Leno!'

INCIDENT: Sean Dyche labeled it as odd that Everton's goal against Fulham in their 1-0 defeat was invalidated due to a foul committed by James Tarkowski on Bernd Leno. Firstly, what are your thoughts on whether this should be considered a foul?

DERMOT STATES: "CORRECT DECISION - ALBEIT FOR A DIFFERENT REASON!

"They may have arrived at the correct conclusion (albeit through incorrect methods). I personally find it to be a severe foul, but upon observation, the individual who scores is actually in an offside position. Therefore, if the referee hadn't blown the whistle, the offside would have been identified by VAR."

Stephen Warnock expressed his anger upon witnessing the incident, as he believed that once again, the goalkeeper was being given preferential treatment. Hopefully, there will be a lesson learned from this, as it was not a foul.

'Referees clamping down on players waving imaginary cards'

INCIDENTS: Referees showed zero tolerance this weekend when players gestured for imaginary cards, resulting in two yellow cards being issued within two minutes by Anthony Taylor. The first card was given to Nicolas Jackson from Chelsea, followed by Alexis Mac Allister from Liverpool. Additionally, Newcastle midfielder Bruno Guimaraes received a yellow card. What message does this send?

DERMOT SAYS: "I believe this short-term inconvenience will lead to long-term benefits. After a few weeks, players will come to realize that such actions are unacceptable and, hopefully, this will serve as a deterrent rather than a punishment. This is what we aim to witness. Currently, it clearly demonstrates to the players that such behavior will not be tolerated."

Stephen Warnock: "I've never liked players trying to get another player booked. It's the referee's decision."

Sue Smith: "I think it will stop players doing it."

Tottenham's James Maddison was booked for dissent against Brentford, arguing that he hadn't even had a chance to speak to the referee before receiving a yellow card. Was this punishment too severe? According to Dermot, in this type of scenario, the referee has already communicated with the player. Maddison may not have approached the referee aggressively, but the issue is his continuous interaction. The only solution to prevent it is to issue a yellow card.

Image:

'Romero VAR decision the correct call'

INCIDENT: James Maddison received a booking in Tottenham's match against Brentford on Sunday. Was this decision justified?

Dermot's Comment: "The right decision!

Given the amount of information that needed to be reviewed, it's understandable that it took some time. However, upon analysis, it was determined that the player was indeed onside. The assistant referee did not signal for an offside, confirming the accuracy of the decision made on the field."

'Penalty rightly awarded to Brentford - but was it clear and obvious?'

INCIDENT: Brentford were granted a penalty after Mathias Jensen was brought down by Heung-Min Son. Initially, referee Robert Jones failed to acknowledge the infringement, leading to play resuming before VAR intervention. Can we consider this as a valid penalty, or was it an unmistakable and glaring officiating mistake?

Dermot argues that it is a foul when a player is caught on the leg without getting the ball. The crucial aspect is determining if it is a clear and obvious error. If Dermot perceives it as a foul, then it is indeed an error. Setting the threshold for such situations presents a dilemma. Ultimately, he believes that the correct decision has been made.

Stephen Warnock expressed his opinion regarding the softness of the decision, highlighting the lack of clarity and obviousness. In his belief, there were similar instances during the previous season that did not receive the same outcome. Furthermore, Stephen asserted that if the current decision is overturned, a similar ruling should be applied to the Dunk incident.

Sue Smith echoed Stephen's sentiment, confirming her agreement with him. Sue regarded the decision as soft and had not anticipated it being overturned. She described it as a mere brushing of the shin.

Dermot: Vicario challenge OK | Warnock: How is that not a foul?

INCIDENT: Could Brentford have had another penalty when Guglielmo Vicario seemed to take out Kevin Schade?

DERMOT SAYS: "NO PENALTY!

"I have never given penalties for that, and I don't see many referees who do. When the goalkeeper comes out, kicks the ball too far, and there is a collision, it is inevitable, and it does not affect the outcome."

Stephen Warnock argues, "You mentioned last season that endangering a player's safety... what more evidence do you need? He did a somersault over him. How is that not a foul? It should be a penalty. It is a reckless challenge. I don't understand why goalkeepers have this unwritten rule that they can come at a player as fast as they want and take them out."

'Martinez foul on Almiron didn't tick red card criteria'

Sue Smith expressed her agreement with the fact that the ball was not awarded. She anticipated this outcome but was curious about the reason behind it. According to her, if the incident had occurred anywhere else on the pitch, it would have been deemed a foul.

INCIDENT: Aston Villa goalkeeper Emiliano Martinez ventured outside of his box and brought down Newcastle forward Miguel Almiron, resulting in him receiving only a yellow card.

Dermot remarks that it was the correct decision. This foul is incredibly cynical, but the player cannot be sent off as it doesn't meet the necessary criteria. The player is not moving towards the goal, and there are other players between him and the goal. Thus, it does not meet the requirements for a red card.

Stephen Warnock: "It's wrong but it's right and that's the frustrating thing about it."

Sue Smith: "He knew exactly what he was doing, takes him out - but knows there's cover behind him."

'Botman not involved in Isak goal, despite being in offside position'

INCIDENT: Newcastle's second goal through Alexander Isak was subject to an offside check, but why were no lines drawn?

DERMOT SAYS: "RIGHT CALL.

Dan Burn is not in an offside position as he passes the ball to Isak, who successfully scores. Although Sven Botman is in an offside position, he does not actively participate in the play. Some may argue that he obstructs Matty Cash, but it appears that Cash unintentionally collides with him.

The Video Assistant Referee (VAR) must make three determinations: Is Burn in an offside position? No. Is Botman in an offside position? Yes, but he is not involved in the play. Does he impede Cash? It seems not.

Stephen Warnock: "Botman subtly shifts to the side, effectively halting the attacker. That's an obstruction, albeit a challenging one to detect."

Sue Smith: "In my opinion, that should have been called a foul. I believe Cash could have recovered his position."

'Burnley penalty call wouldn't have been overturned if given'

INCIDENT: During Friday Night Football, Burnley unsuccessfully appealed for a penalty after Zeki Amdouni fell following a challenge from Manchester City defender Manuel Akanji. Were you expecting the incident to be reviewed by VAR, considering Amdouni's arm was being held?

DERMOT SAYS: "COULD BE AWARDED OR DISMISSED EITHER WAY!

INCIDENT: Burnley had Anass Zaroury sent off in stoppage time after VAR suggested referee Craig Pawson upgrade his yellow card. Did they get this right?

'VAR right to recommend Zaroury upgrade from yellow to red'

If the referee awards a penalty, it would never be overturned as it is not an exact science. There will always be a certain level of uncertainty. VAR, on the other hand, is primarily used for assessing incidents related to red cards.

DERMOT SAYS: "RIGHT DECISION!

"His studs were in his calf. This is what VAR is for. It's not a good tackle. That's a clear and obvious error. We all agree that's a red card."