1 / 3 today
βš– VAR Verdict Β· Case #71

Paris Saint-Germain vs Arsenal

UEFA Champions League Β· 2025/2026 Β· 2026-05-30 Β· 1-1 (4-3)

Correct (No Call) medium confidence
Penalty (push/hold in box)
πŸ—³οΈ Community verdict β€” vote now 4 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 (push/hold in box)
Law cited
Law 12 β€” Fouls and Misconduct
Recommended action
Play on β€” no penalty, no free kick in either direction
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†’

In this incident, Arsenal's striker went to ground in the Paris Saint-Germain penalty area and demanded a penalty kick β€” one of the most controversial moments of the match. The referee let play continue, and based on what the frames show, that was the correct call. Looking at the build-up, both players had their arms in contact with each other from the start, and crucially, the Arsenal attacker can be seen wrapping/hooking his own arm around the PSG defender's β€” meaning the grappling was clearly two-way, not a one-sided hold by the defender. Under the Laws of the Game, mutual wrestling in the penalty area does not automatically produce a penalty; the defender's contact must be the primary cause of the fall. Here it wasn't: both players were restraining each other, and the fall was the product of shared balance disruption rather than a clear shove or grab from PSG. The play-on was the right decision, even given UEFA's generally tighter standard for box contact.

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†’