When Ghana boss Carlos Queiroz sarcastically remarked that "VAR went for a coffee" after his side were denied a late penalty against England, he captured the frustration of fans and pundits alike. The incident, in which England defender Ezri Konsa appeared to catch Ghana's Prince Kwabena Adu on the knee without touching the ball, was not reviewed by the video assistant referee. But while such a challenge would likely have been penalised in the Premier League, the World Cup operates under a different set of VAR guidelines.
The incident occurred late in Tuesday's goalless draw between England and Ghana. Konsa came across to challenge Adu inside the box, and replays showed he made contact with the Ghanaian's knee and not the ball. Despite calls for a spot-kick from Ghana's players and manager, referee and VAR officials allowed play to continue. BBC pundits Wayne Rooney and Micah Richards both said it could easily have been a penalty. So why was it not given?
“How VAR at the World Cup differs from the Premier League, using the Ghana-England penalty incident.”
The answer lies in how FIFA, world football's governing body, instructs its referees to use VAR. Pierluigi Collina, FIFA's head of referees, has set a higher threshold for on-field challenges – meaning more robust challenges are allowed to go unpunished – and demands consistency: if you let more tackles go on the field, you must have fewer VAR interventions. This approach is designed to reduce the number of stoppages and keep the game flowing, but it can leave teams feeling aggrieved when clear fouls are overlooked.
For UK viewers accustomed to the Premier League's VAR implementation, this can be confusing. In England's top flight, VAR regularly intervenes for incidents like Konsa's – a high, reckless challenge with no contact on the ball. Indeed, Darren Cann, the 2010 World Cup final assistant referee, acknowledged that the wrong decision was made, but noted that the higher threshold meant VAR was unlikely to step in. This difference in philosophy means that what looks like a clear penalty in the Premier League may not be reviewed at a World Cup.
Why does this matter for UK readers? Many British football fans watch both the Premier League and major tournaments, and may be unaware that VAR protocols differ. Understanding this can reduce confusion when seemingly obvious decisions are not reviewed. It also affects how England will approach defending in future World Cup games – players like Konsa, who escaped punishment here, may not be so lucky next time, while attackers may need to adjust their expectations of what constitutes a foul in the box.
Q: Why was the Konsa challenge on Adu not given as a penalty? FIFA's head of referees, Pierluigi Collina, has set a higher threshold for VAR intervention at the World Cup compared to domestic leagues. The challenge was deemed to not meet that threshold, so VAR did not recommend a review.
Q: Does VAR work differently at the World Cup than in the Premier League? Yes. The Premier League has a lower threshold for VAR intervention, meaning more incidents are reviewed. FIFA wants fewer stoppages and greater consistency, so it instructs referees to let more physical challenges go and only use VAR for clear and obvious errors under its stricter criteria.
Q: Will England's draw with Ghana affect their World Cup campaign? England still top Group L and need only a draw against Panama to guarantee progression. However, the performance raised concerns about defensive solidity – John Stones is expected to return to stabilise the backline. The team's pressing style was praised, but they must improve their finishing and decision-making in the final third.
What happens next? England face Panama on Saturday night in their final group game. A win or draw ensures top spot in Group L, while a defeat could complicate qualification. Thomas Tuchel is likely to rotate his squad, with Stones and possibly others restored to the starting XI. Meanwhile, FIFA's VAR approach will continue to be scrutinised as the tournament progresses, particularly if more contentious decisions arise.