It's the Monday VAR thread. A busy one today for some reason.... including:

- Bamford offside
- Handball!
- Barkley offside

Starting with the worst of the weekend, the Patrick Bamford disallowed goal for Leeds at Palace.

There's no point going over the general flaws again, you can read about that in detail in the attached thread, but I'll cover the specifics of this decision. https://twitter.com/DaleJohnsonESPN/status/1318143868462911490

First a reminder that you can now play the ball with the top of your arm after the law changed in the summer. It's why Mane was offside against Everton too.

And you can score with it; Gabriel already has for Arsenal against Fulham.

There are a few key questions over the Bamford decision:

- Subjective aspects of the application
- Availability of the definitive camera angle
- Excessive forensic analysis

I'll cover these in a bit of detail.

The key tech issue is the level of subjectivity for which part of the arm the VAR selects on each player.

There is greater margin for "error" here than in the Mane decision a few weeks ago, when the defensive line was to the foot. Only Mane was subjective, and to a small area.

I'd suggest some VARs may rely on the tech too much, fearful that a camera angle will later be found that shows a clear offside.

So rather than looking at this picture and not being too forensic, they use the tech. Once tech is applied, it's to the millimetre.

Mike Dean took this to full callibration, but another VAR may look at the same freeze frame and decide not to do so and allow the goal.

Offside tech is heralded as the best available, yet there are so many layers of subjectivity to it. But the final result must be taken.

Bamford has his arm outstretched while Nathaniel Clyne has his by his side. It is far more difficult to calculate to the same point on both.

If Mike Dean did this again, he would probably plot two different points. (Which doesn't mean he wouldn't come to the same decision)

That each time you make this offside calculation you could come to a slightly different placing for the offside line on each player means trusting the tech implicitly on such tight decisions is questionable.

But this is what FIFA has told the Premier League it must do.

There have been valid questions about which points were plotted.

But pulling Bamford's line back to match Clyne puts it through the striker's armpit, which is no longer the plot point. So it is *possible* the plot points did not change the decision here.

But you must ask how the offside decision be truly be trusted in such a tight case when the second defender is obstructed.

The VAR will check several camera angles and choose the best one to apply the tech. If this was the best, how could it definitively rule Bamford offside?

As previously mentioned, the Dutch and the Danes are operating VAR with a tolerance level of 10cm - which PL wanted. So this goal would have stood.

Those leagues took the decision unilaterally - while PL was ordered to accept FIFA protocol after ignoring much of it last season.

There's no way this goal would have been disallowed in the UCL. Refs' chief Roberto Rosetti (on IFAB Refs and Technical panels) is adamant it should not be so draconian.

But don't go thinking this is only happening in the Premier League. It's in the other major leagues too.

That's taken up a lot of tweets, so not much time for many other incidents. But we need to cover handball.

Much has been made of the change in interpretation at the end of September, but the truth is we have been lulled into a false sense of security.

Since the handball interpretation was tweaked, there have been hardly any examples of a possible handball penalty with the arm away from the body.

In fact the only one I can recall is Andrew Robertson against Sheffield United, and that may not have been inside the box.

So while people have been thinking the handball law has been fixed, in truth we've had nothing to base this on.

The question is whether the Kilman and Clyne handball penalties should be exempted on any of these clauses from the revamped interpretation.

Kilman definitely "does not have the ability to react".

Gomez is more arguable due to the distance the ball travelled, but "the arm is in an expected position given player's action".

We'll see in the coming weeks just where the needle is.

On the Liverpool penalty in that game, incredible that the challenges on Sterling and Mane were almost identical.

But the VAR cannot intervene as the challenge on Sterling was outside the box and too far back in the move that led to the Liverpool penalty.

Though subjective, it was always highly likely John McGinn's goal would be disallowed. With Ross Barkley jumping in front of Bernd Leno, he had to affect the goalkeeper's line of vision.

Reminder, whether you believe Leno would save it is irrelevant to this decision.

On the West Ham offside, the law was changed several years ago so you aren't offside just for being in an offside position.

Unless Halle gets directly involved in the play, offside will not be activated. It's tough on a defender who then plays the ball. But it's the law.

Harry Maguire had a decent claim for a penalty against Everton. It may be surprising this didn't go to a pitchside review, but it's almost certain any penalty would have been ruled out for a push by Maguire on Pickford. So swings and roundabouts.

We did finally get our fourth subjective handball penalty at West Ham on Saturday night. But we should have had one on Friday night when Theo Walcott was fouled.

Even though the defender won the ball, he got a huge chunk of Walcott too and it should have been a penalty.

All the biggest VAR controversies this season have been rated and slated in this article. https://www.espn.com/soccer/english-premier-league/story/4218983/var-controversies-in-the-premier-league-202021

VAR STATS

Overturns: 36
Rejected: 1
Goals: 12
Disallowed: 12
Pens: 13 (4 missed)
-for handball: 7
-overturned: 2
-retakes: 1
Offside goals: 10
Allowed after offside: 2
Handball: 0
Allowed after handball: 0
Reds: 4
-overturned: 1 https://www.espn.com/soccer/english-premier-league/story/4182135/how-var-decisions-affected-every-premier-league-club-in-2020-21

VAR STATS (cont)

Most for: Crystal Palace 4
Fewest for: Burnley, Chelsea, WBA 0
Most against: Liverpool 5
Fewest against: Five clubs 0
Most net for: Everton, Sheff Utd 3
Most net against: Liverpool 4
Most involvement: Crystal Palace 8

VAR STATS (cont)

Most goals awarded: Everton, Leicester, Sheff Utd 2
Most goals disallowed: Liverpool 3
Most goals to opposition: Brighton, Tottenham 2
Most goals disallowed for opposition: Aston Villa, West Ham 2
Most penalties awarded: Leicester, Man United, Sheffield United 2

VAR overturns (net score)

Everton +3
Sheffield United +3
Southampton +2
Arsenal +1
Aston Villa +1
Leicester +1
Man City +1
Newcastle +1
West Ham +1
Burnley 0
Crystal Palace 0
Wolves 0
Brighton -1
Chelsea -1
Leeds -1
Man United -1
West Brom -1
Fulham -2
Tottenham -3
Liverpool -4

VAR overturns - decisions for

Crystal Palace 4
Brighton 3
Everton 3
Man United 3
Newcastle 3
Sheffield United 3
Southampton 3
Aston Villa 2
Leicester City 2
West Ham 2
Wolves 2
Arsenal 1
Fulham 1
Leeds 1
Liverpool 1
Man City 1
Tottenham Hotspur 1
Burnley 0
Chelsea 0
West Brom 0

VAR overturns - decisions against

Liverpool 5
Brighton 4
Crystal Palace 4
Man United 4
Tottenham 4
Fulham 3
Leeds 2
Newcastle 2
Wolves 2
Aston Villa 1
Chelsea 1
Leicester City 1
Southampton 1
West Brom 1
West Ham 1
Arsenal 0
Burnley 0
Everton 0
Man City 0
Sheffield United 0