It was an unusual and instructive weekend for referee Darren England, highlighting ongoing confusion around the handball law and the application of VAR in the Premier League.
On Saturday, England was operating as video assistant referee when Farai Hallam, overseeing his first Premier League match, declined his recommendation to award Manchester City a handball penalty. Less than 24 hours later, the roles were reversed.
During Chelsea’s 3-1 victory at Crystal Palace, England was the on-field referee summoned to the pitchside monitor to review a potential handball incident — one that ultimately resulted in a penalty being awarded after significant deliberation.
The incident involved Palace defender Jaydee Canvot, who blocked a goal-bound effort from Joao Pedro with an arm that appeared to be in a natural position by his side. England spent close to two minutes reviewing the footage and, according to BBC Sport sources, required considerable persuasion before reaching a decision.
The VAR on duty was Matt Donohue, who has refereed just four Premier League matches but regularly operates from Stockley Park. Donohue argued that a penalty was warranted because Canvot’s arm prevented a goal. England eventually accepted that interpretation and pointed to the spot.
However, guidance from the International Football Association Board (Ifab) suggests that this conclusion may be flawed.
Ifab has previously addressed this exact scenario on its Football Rules platform, posing the question: “A player prevents the ball from going into their own goal with their hand/arm but does not deliberately handle the ball and does not make their body unnaturally bigger?”
The answer is unequivocal: “This is not a handball.”
Much of the confusion stems from a 2024 amendment to the wording around denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity (DOGSO).
The revised law states: “Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by committing a non-deliberate handball offence and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned.”
The critical detail lies in the word “offence.” A handball must first meet the criteria of an offence — namely, the arm being in an unnatural position or the body being made unnaturally bigger — before DOGSO considerations apply.
The law change did not redefine what constitutes handball. It merely altered the disciplinary sanction from a red card to a yellow card in cases of non-deliberate handball denying a goal. However, this nuance has been widely misunderstood, leading to the incorrect assumption that any handball stopping a goal is automatically punishable by a penalty.
The intention behind the update was to align handball decisions with foul challenges under the “double jeopardy” principle, not to broaden the definition of handball itself.
There is greater scrutiny on arm position when the ball is travelling towards goal, but context still matters.
A comparable situation arose during Wolves’ defeat at Manchester City, when Yerson Mosquera was involved in a handball appeal. While the decision was overturned on that occasion, it may have been given had the defender been positioned directly on the goal line, with his arm clearly away from his body.
That was not the case with Canvot. His arm was tight to his side and the ball deflected up off his hip before striking it. Under current interpretations, this would not ordinarily constitute a handball offence.
It therefore appears likely that the Premier League’s Key Match Incidents (KMI) panel may conclude that VAR intervention was incorrect.
Logically, the outcome should not depend on whether the defender is standing directly in front of goal or a few yards to one side, nor on whether another defender or the goalkeeper is positioned behind them.
Former Liverpool midfielder Danny Murphy was unequivocal on Match of the Day.
“Canvot’s arm is not in an unnatural position — it’s right beside him,” Murphy said. “I don’t really know why VAR have even got involved. They’ve ended up making the wrong decision.”
Former Premier League assistant referee Darren Cann echoed that assessment, telling BBC Sport: “No penalty in my opinion, as Canvot neither deliberately handled the ball nor had his arm in an unnatural position.”
Wayne Rooney added that “everyone’s getting fed up” with recurring VAR errors.
In November, Newcastle’s Harvey Barnes was struck on the arm while defending a corner on the goal line, with his arm alongside his body. No VAR intervention followed, and the KMI panel unanimously supported the decision.
This was also the second time this season Crystal Palace have been on the wrong end of a controversial VAR call against Chelsea. Earlier in the campaign, Eberechi Eze had a goal disallowed after Marc Guehi was ruled to be standing too close to a defensive wall — the only instance of such a decision in the Premier League this season.
A separate handball appeal during Arsenal’s defeat to Manchester United further illustrates the complexity of the law.
With Arsenal trailing 2-1 late in the game, Harry Maguire was accused of handling the ball inside the area. However, the laws provide an exemption when a player uses an arm to support their body while falling — even if the arm subsequently lands on the ball.
Maguire was already falling, with his arm extended for support, before Mikel Merino struck the ball. That context was decisive.
This exemption is not absolute. A defender can still be penalised if they deliberately move their arm into the ball’s path. Tomas Soucek (West Ham vs Chelsea, February 2023) and Martin Ødegaard (Arsenal vs Liverpool, December 2023) both avoided penalties incorrectly after making deliberate movements.
In Maguire’s case, no such intent was evident — making the decision consistent with the law, even if it remains controversial.
