OURVAR judged the referee's decision: Correct (No Call). You're voting on whether OURVAR's analysis is right — not on the referee.
Do you agree with OURVAR's verdict?
Every vote helps sharpen OURVAR's accuracy — 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. 🙏
The referee correctly waved play on after the ball struck an Arsenal player's arm (and then hand) during a crowded set-piece situation. Under the current 2025/26 IFAB Laws, there is an important new rule: if the ball hits a player's arm having been played by one of their own team-mates, it is not a handball offence — provided no goal is scored directly from it, which was not the case here. Even setting that new rule aside, the contact appeared accidental and in the context of a physical aerial contest where arms are naturally extended for balance. The referee got this right by letting play continue, and VAR had no grounds to intervene.
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.
- Key factors that drove the AI's call
- Full IFAB law citations + frame references
- Vote, comment, and discuss with other fans
Ask OURVAR
Have a question about this verdict?
Push back on the verdict. Ask the AI 'why?', 'what about the elbow angle?', 'what's the precedent?' — and get IFAB-grounded answers from the same model that called the case. Pro 25/month · WC 50 · GB 150.
Discussion