Professional Refereeing chief Howard Webb has stood by the decision to dismiss Phil Foden during the Manchester derby, explaining that the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system was unable to intervene and issue a caution to Bruno Fernandes for the "petulant" kick that ignited the confrontation. The incident unfolded in Manchester City’s 1-0 victory at Old Trafford, when Foden was shown a red card for violent conduct after he swung his leg at the United captain following a foul.
Although Fernandes appeared to have initiated the clash with an initial foot‑to‑foot contact, he walked away without any sanction. The sequence of events quickly became tangled as the VAR team attempted to sort out a separate potential penalty involving Enzo Fernandez and Youri Tielemans. While referee Michael Oliver was in the process of brandishing the red card for Fonda, VAR official Matt Donohue was heard asking, "Who has been sent off and for what?" The question came amid a discussion about whether a penalty should be awarded for the earlier challenge.
Once the assistants alerted Donohue to the kick from Fernandes to Foden, the focus shifted to the melee that had erupted between the two players. During the review, the on‑field referee insisted that the ball had been played by Enzo Fernandez and that the contact was side‑by‑side, not a foul. VAR then examined another angle to confirm that no penalty should be given, while simultaneously noting a possible "kick‑out" by Foden.
The assistant VAR asked, "Has he kicked him there?" and later described the incident as a possible case of violent conduct. After confirming that there was no penalty, Oliver confirmed his decision: "Red card, Phil Foden. Kick out into the body of Bruno [Fernandes]." He added that the foul was initially by Bruno on Phil, but that the two players became entangled and Foden delivered a retaliatory kick as they separated.
Webb, who serves as the chief operating officer of the Professional Referees' Association, later issued a detailed statement. 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 have seen a similar dismissal for João Gomes at Aston Villa, and the referee on the field made the correct call." Webb then turned his attention to Fernandes' earlier action, describing it as "petulant" rather than violent. He argued that violent conduct requires a level of excessive force or brutality that was not present in Fernandes' kick.
According to Webb, the appropriate sanction for Fernandes would have been a yellow card, but VAR does not have the authority to issue cautions retroactively. "If everything had been missed and nothing was given against Foden, VAR could have stepped in to review his actions for a possible red and capture Fernandes' yellow‑card offence. Because the referee already issued the red, that option is closed," Webb explained. Sky Sports analyst Laura Hunter echoed many of Webb's points while adding her own perspective.
She noted that the VAR review was chaotic, with Donohue distracted by the earlier penalty discussion. Hunter argued that the immediacy of Oliver's decision to send Foden off was crucial; the referee acted quickly, indicating confidence in his assessment, and VAR typically refrains from overturning clear on‑field calls.
She highlighted that the threshold for VAR intervention in subjective matters has been deliberately raised to avoid endless re‑refereeing, a policy she views positively. Nevertheless, Hunter questioned why VAR failed to scrutinise the trigger for Foden's retaliation. She pointed out that the Manchester United captain appeared to be the first offender, delivering a kick that provoked Foden's response. In her view, both players should have been treated equally, with Fernandes receiving at least a caution for his role.
She criticized the lack of mention of the initial kick in the official report and suggested that VAR's primary job is to alert the referee to such missed incidents. The broader debate touches on the evolving role of VAR in English football. Since its introduction, VAR has been tasked with correcting clear and obvious errors, particularly in goal‑mouth situations, penalty decisions, and instances of direct red‑card offences. However, the technology is not permitted to intervene for matters that fall under the referee's discretion, such as issuing a yellow card for dissent or a minor foul.
This limitation is designed to preserve the flow of the game and to keep the referee as the ultimate authority on the pitch. In the Foden‑Fernandes case, the referee's immediate red‑card decision effectively locked the VAR option, preventing any further review of Fernandes' earlier kick. Critics argue that this creates an inconsistency: a player can be punished for a more serious offence while the provocation goes unpunished, potentially influencing the fairness of the outcome.
Supporters counter that the system works as intended; the referee saw a clear act of violent conduct and acted accordingly, while the less severe action did not meet the threshold for VAR intervention. The incident also reignited discussions about player conduct and the responsibilities of captains. Both Foden and Fernandes are high‑profile figures, and their actions are scrutinised by fans, pundits, and governing bodies alike.
While Foden's retaliation was deemed excessive, Fernandes' earlier kick was described as "petulant"—a term that suggests frustration but not malicious intent. The distinction matters because disciplinary guidelines differentiate between violent conduct, which warrants a straight red, and unsporting behaviour, which typically results in a caution. In the aftermath, Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola defended his player, emphasizing that Foden was reacting to a provocation and that the red card was harsh. United’s manager Erik ten Hag, on the other hand, expressed disappointment that Fernandes escaped any sanction, arguing that the incident should have been dealt with more consistently.
Both clubs have lodged formal complaints with the Football Association, seeking clarification on the application of VAR protocols in such complex scenarios. As the season progresses, the Foden‑Fernandes episode will likely be referenced in future debates about VAR's scope and the balance between technology and human judgment.
It underscores the challenges officials face in real time, juggling multiple incidents, communication among the officiating team, and the pressure to make swift, accurate decisions. Whether the governing bodies will adjust the guidelines to allow VAR to address missed cautions in the future remains to be seen, but the conversation sparked by Webb’s comments and Hunter’s analysis ensures that the topic will stay in the spotlight.