The Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system was introduced to bring fairness and accuracy to football officiating, ensuring that major errors, especially those affecting the outcome of a match, could be reviewed and corrected. However, the application of VAR has not been without controversy. A recent incident involving Jordan Henderson has reignited the debate around VAR, the consistency of its usage, and whether it truly serves justice on the pitch.
In a high-stakes Premier League encounter, Henderson committed a challenge that many pundits, fans, and former referees argued was a clear case of Denial of an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity (DOGSO). Despite this, the VAR review did not recommend a red card, sparking outrage and prompting a reevaluation of the rules and their enforcement. This article delves into the details of the incident, the laws governing DOGSO, the role of VAR, and why, ultimately, Henderson should have been sent off.
The Incident: A Closer Look
Match Context
The match in question was a tightly contested fixture, with both teams battling for crucial points in the Premier League standings. Henderson, playing in a holding midfield role, was instrumental in breaking up attacks and initiating forward movements. However, in the 37th minute, the dynamic of the game shifted when he made a tactical foul to stop a clear attacking threat.
The Challenge
A swift counter-attack was launched by the opposition, catching Henderson’s team off guard. The striker, having beaten the last defender, was through on goal with only the goalkeeper to beat. Henderson, tracking back, brought him down with a clumsy challenge just outside the penalty area. The referee immediately blew the whistle and issued a yellow card.
VAR Review
Despite the apparent severity and implications of the foul, the VAR did not recommend an on-field review. The broadcast footage showed multiple angles suggesting the striker was clean through on goal, with Henderson’s foul denying a clear goal-scoring opportunity.
Understanding DOGSO: The Laws of the Game
What is DOGSO?
DOGSO, or Denial of an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity, is defined by Law 12 of the IFAB Laws of the Game. It refers to incidents where a player commits a foul to prevent a clear chance to score. The key factors referees are instructed to consider include:
- Distance to goal
- General direction of play
- Likelihood of controlling the ball
- Location and number of defenders
Red Card Criteria
If a player commits an offence that denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, the referee is required to send the player off (issue a red card). Exceptions are made if the offence is an attempt to play the ball inside the penalty area, in which case a yellow card may be shown under the “triple jeopardy” rule.
Application to Henderson’s Challenge
Applying the criteria:
- The attacker was just outside the penalty box.
- He was moving directly toward goal.
- The ball was under close control.
- No defenders were in front—only the goalkeeper remained.
Every element points to a DOGSO situation, which should result in a red card. Henderson’s challenge was not an attempt to play the ball but rather a tactical foul.
The Role of VAR: What Went Wrong?
VAR Protocol
VAR is used for four types of decisions:
- Goals and offences leading up to a goal
- Penalty decisions and offences leading up to penalties
- Direct red card incidents
- Mistaken identity
The Henderson incident falls squarely into the “direct red card” category. VAR should have intervened to recommend an on-field review.
Failure in Implementation
The failure lies in VAR’s decision not to act. Despite clear evidence from multiple angles, the VAR did not advise the referee to review the decision. This raises questions about:
- Training and interpretation of VAR officials
- Communication between VAR and the on-field referee
- Fear of “re-refereeing” the match rather than correcting clear errors
Reactions and Expert Opinions
Pundits and Analysts
Former referees and analysts were unanimous in their criticism. Dermot Gallagher, a former Premier League referee, stated:
“This is a textbook DOGSO. Every box is ticked. VAR had a duty to intervene.”
Jamie Carragher, in his post-match analysis, added:
“If that’s not a red card, I don’t know what is. VAR was brought in for exactly this type of situation.”
Player and Manager Reactions
The fouled striker expressed disbelief in post-match interviews, suggesting the decision changed the course of the game. His manager was more direct:
“We’re fighting for every point. That decision cost us not only a goal but also the game.”
Historical Comparisons
Several past incidents mirror this one, where similar fouls led to red cards:
- David Luiz (Arsenal vs Wolves, 2021) – Sent off for a light contact deemed DOGSO.
- Victor Lindelöf (Manchester United vs Crystal Palace, 2020) – Escaped a red card in a similar incident; VAR criticism followed.
- Ousmane Dembélé (Barcelona vs Sevilla, 2020) – Sent off for denying a clear chance.
The inconsistency in decision-making fuels the ongoing debate about VAR’s reliability.
The Cost of Inconsistency
Impact on the Game
VAR was intended to eliminate egregious errors. When it fails to act on such clear incidents:
- Trust in officiating declines
- Matches are unfairly influenced
- Teams are unfairly disadvantaged
This leads to a lack of respect for officials and greater player dissent on the pitch.
Fan Backlash
Social media erupted after the incident, with hashtags like #VAROut and #JusticeForDOGSO trending for hours. Many fans called for greater transparency in VAR decision-making, including live audio communication and referee explanations, as seen in other sports.
What Needs to Change?
Clearer Guidelines for VAR Officials
Referees and VARs must be better trained to apply the DOGSO rules consistently. This includes scenario-based training and real-match simulations.
Public Access to VAR Decisions
The introduction of real-time explanations, akin to the NFL or rugby, could demystify decisions and build trust.
Post-Match Accountability
Review panels should publicly address controversial incidents and hold officials accountable when VAR fails.
Consistency Across Competitions
UEFA, FIFA, and domestic leagues must standardize interpretations of DOGSO and other rules to prevent confusion among players and fans.
Frequently Asked Question
What is DOGSO in football?
DOGSO stands for Denial of an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity. It refers to situations where a player illegally prevents an opponent from having a clear chance to score a goal. This usually results in a red card, depending on the circumstances and where the foul occurs.
What are the criteria for a DOGSO red card?
According to the IFAB Laws of the Game, a red card for DOGSO is issued if:
- The attacker was moving directly toward the goal
- They had clear control or likelihood of controlling the ball
- There were no other defenders able to challenge
- The foul occurred close enough to the goal
All four must be met to qualify as an obvious goal-scoring opportunity.
Why was Henderson not sent off in this case?
Despite the foul meeting all DOGSO criteria, VAR did not intervene to suggest a red card. The on-field referee issued a yellow, and the VAR team chose not to advise a review. This sparked debate about VAR inconsistency and its failure to correct obvious errors.
Was Henderson’s foul an attempt to play the ball?
No. Replays showed Henderson clipped the attacker from behind, without any genuine attempt to win the ball. According to IFAB rules, this increases the likelihood of a red card, especially outside the penalty area.
Does the “triple jeopardy” rule apply here?
No. The “triple jeopardy” exception (penalty + red card + suspension) only applies when:
- A penalty is awarded
- The defender genuinely tries to play the ball
Henderson’s foul occurred outside the box and wasn’t a genuine attempt to play the ball, so the exception doesn’t apply.
What should VAR have done in this situation?
VAR should have advised the referee to review the foul on the pitch-side monitor to assess whether it was DOGSO. Based on multiple camera angles, a red card would likely have been shown after review.
Are there past examples of similar DOGSO red cards?
Yes, similar incidents where red cards were given include:
- David Luiz vs Wolves (2021) – Sent off for DOGSO
- Oleksandr Zinchenko vs Tottenham (2020) – Sent off for stopping a counter
- Nemanja Matic vs Hull (2017) – Red for denying a clear chance
These were all cited in debates about VAR consistency after Henderson’s case.
What changes are being recommended for VAR?
Critics and analysts suggest:
- Improved VAR training on rules like DOGSO
- Live explanations from referees (like in rugby or NFL)
- Public accountability and transparency
- Consistency across leagues and competitions
Can a club appeal a non-red card decision?
Generally, no. Clubs can appeal red cards but not decisions where a card was not issued. However, incidents can be reviewed by referee committees, though they rarely overturn decisions unless there’s a gross error.
Why does this decision matter so much?
Such decisions can directly impact the outcome of matches and even seasons. If VAR fails to correct a clear DOGSO foul, it undermines the credibility of officiating, affecting fans’ trust, team morale, and competitive fairness.
Conclusion
The Henderson incident is more than just a questionable decision—it’s a symbol of deeper issues plaguing the VAR system. While technology has the potential to enhance fairness, it must be applied correctly, consistently, and transparently.
