1 / 3 today
βš– VAR Verdict Β· Case #35

Newcastle United vs West Ham United

Premier League Β· 2025/2026 Β· 2026-05-17 Β· 3-1

Correct (No Call) medium confidence
Penalty (handball)
πŸ—³οΈ Community verdict β€” vote now 5 votes needed for verdict

OURVAR judged the referee's decision: Correct (No Call). You're voting on whether OURVAR's analysis is right β€” not on the referee.

Do you agree with OURVAR's verdict?

Every vote helps sharpen OURVAR's accuracy β€” and we're grateful for it. The AI isn't infallible, and your verdict is exactly what improves it, case by case. You're helping build the VAR we all deserve. πŸ™

Incident
Penalty (handball)
Law cited
Law 12 β€” Handball
Recommended action
Play on β€” no penalty. The arm contact is consistent with natural athletic movement; no handball offence under 2025/26 Law 12.
Referee
Affected team
On-field decision
Play on (no penalty)
🎬 Spot another clip we missed? Suggest it β€” we review every submission.
Suggest a clip β†’

The West Ham player's arm appears extended but at approximately chest/waist height β€” not raised above or beyond shoulder level, which is the primary 'unnatural position' indicator under IFAB guidance

πŸ”’ Premium

Read the full OURVAR breakdown

Sign up to see every key factor, the IFAB law clauses cited, and the frame-by-frame reasoning that led to this verdict.

Ask OURVAR

πŸ”’ PREMIUM

Have a question about this verdict?

Push back on the verdict. Ask the AI 'why?', 'what about the elbow angle?', 'what's the precedent?' β€” and get IFAB-grounded answers from the same model that called the case. Pro 25/month Β· WC 50 Β· GB 150.

Discussion

You're posting as a guest β€” one comment per discussion. Sign in to post more and comment under your name: Sign up free β†’