Professional Refereeing chief Howard Webb has stood by the decision to dismiss Phil Foden during the Manchester derby, explaining that the VAR team was unable to intervene and issue a caution to Bruno Fernandes for the "petulant" foot‑strike that ignited the fracas. The incident unfolded in Manchester City’s narrow 1-0 victory at Old Trafford, when Foden, after being challenged by United captain Bruno Fernandes, lashed out with a forceful kick that the referee deemed violent conduct. Fernandes, who appeared to have initiated the clash with a quick jab at Foden, escaped any sanction, prompting a heated debate about consistency and the limits of video‑assistant refereeing. The sequence of events was anything but straightforward.
As the ball fell to Enzo Fernández, the United midfielder made a challenge on Youri Tielemans, prompting the VAR officials to pause the action and examine whether a penalty should be awarded. While referee Michael Oliver was in the process of brandishing a red card for Foden, VAR official Matt Donohue could be heard asking, "Who has been sent off and for what?" This question came moments after the assistant VAR highlighted the potential penalty situation, creating a brief but noticeable confusion in the video‑review room. Soon after, Donohue was alerted to the second part of the incident: Fernandes’ apparent kick on Foden that had set off the melee. The VAR team reviewed the footage, with the assistant VAR noting a possible "kick‑out" and the referee asking for confirmation, "Has he kicked him there?" The conversation continued, with VAR confirming that Enzo Fernández had indeed played the ball and that there was no penalty to award.
The focus then shifted to the violent conduct claim. Oliver described the situation as a "kick out into the body of Bruno Fernandes" and indicated that he believed Foden had struck after a brief tussle. VAR responded, "That looks like a clear red card to me," and after a brief exchange the red card was confirmed.
Webb later elaborated on his view of the incident in a press briefing. He said, "I agree with the red card for Phil Foden for violent conduct. He kicked out with force into the upper body of Bruno Fernandes.
We saw a similar dismissal for Joao Gomes at Aston Villa, and the on‑field referee made the correct call." He went on to differentiate between the two players' actions, describing Fernandes’ foot‑strike as "petulant rather than violent." According to Webb, violent conduct requires a level of excessive force or brutality that he did not see in Fernandes’ movement. Consequently, he argued that the appropriate sanction for Fernandes would have been a yellow card, a disciplinary measure that VAR is not permitted to impose retrospectively. "If all of it was missed and nothing was given against Foden, then VAR could step in and see Fonden's actions for a possible red card and capture Fernandes' yellow card action.
Because the referee gave the red card, that option is not open for VAR," Webb explained. Sky Sports analyst Laura Hunter offered a contrasting perspective, noting that the VAR review appeared disjointed and that the assistant VAR seemed preoccupied with the earlier penalty question.
She argued that the VAR room failed to adequately address the trigger for Foden’s retaliation. "In reality, the Manchester United captain is the first offender and Foden's kick was retaliation for the kick he received after being fouled," Hunter wrote. She criticized the lack of a caution for Fernandes, calling the disparity a "huge oversight" and suggesting that both players deserved equal treatment.
Hunter also highlighted that the VAR protocol deliberately raises the threshold for intervening in subjective decisions, aiming to avoid constant re‑refereeing, but she questioned whether that approach served fairness in this case. The broader debate touches on the evolving role of VAR in football. Since its introduction, VAR has been tasked with correcting clear and obvious errors in four key areas: goals, penalty decisions, direct red cards, and cases of mistaken identity.
However, the system is not designed to issue cautions or to reinterpret the severity of a foul that the on‑field referee has already judged. This limitation means that once a red card is shown, VAR cannot retroactively add a yellow for another player involved in the same incident. Critics argue that this creates inconsistencies, especially when one participant receives a severe sanction while another escapes any punishment for a comparable action. In the Foden‑Fernandes episode, the on‑field referee’s quick decision to send off the City forward left little room for VAR to intervene.
Oliver’s confidence, reflected in his rapid dismissal, signalled to the VAR team that the decision was unlikely to be overturned. The VAR officials, adhering to protocol, confirmed the red card and moved on, leaving Fernandes’ earlier kick unpunished.
Some observers, like Webb, view this as a correct application of the rules, while others see it as a missed opportunity to enforce consistency. The incident also underscores the importance of communication within the VAR suite.
The recorded exchange shows moments where the VAR officials discuss multiple aspects of the play simultaneously – a potential penalty, the nature of the kick, and the disciplinary outcome. Such multitasking can lead to confusion, as evidenced by the overlapping questions about who was sent off and why. Improving the clarity of these conversations could help ensure that all relevant actions are examined thoroughly.
Ultimately, the Foden red card and Fernandes’ escape from a caution will likely remain a point of contention among fans and pundits. It highlights the fine line referees and VAR must walk between maintaining the flow of the game and ensuring equitable treatment of all players. As the technology continues to evolve, the footballing community will watch closely to see whether future protocol adjustments can address scenarios like this, where one player's violent conduct is punished while another's similarly aggressive act is deemed merely "petulant" and goes unpunished.