In the heated atmosphere of the Manchester derby, professional referee chief Howard Webb has publicly stood by the decision to dismiss Phil Foden after the Manchester City midfielder was shown a red card for violent conduct. At the same time, Webb explained why Bruno Fernandes was not booked for the earlier, arguably provocative, kick that helped spark the confrontation. The incident unfolded during Manchester City’s 1-0 victory at Old Trafford and quickly became a flashpoint for debate about the role of VAR and the consistency of disciplinary actions on the pitch. The sequence began when City captain Kevin De Bruyne was challenged by United captain Bruno Fernandes, leading to a foul on De Bruyne.
In the ensuing scramble, Fernandes appeared to deliver a quick, somewhat reckless kick toward Foden, who was already on the receiving end of a challenge. Foden, visibly upset, retaliated with a forceful kick that connected with Fernandes' upper body.
The on‑field referee, Michael Oliver, immediately deemed the contact to be violent conduct and produced a red card, sending the young City star off for the remainder of the match. While the red card was clear, the situation surrounding Fernandes’ earlier kick was more ambiguous.
The VAR team, led by senior official Matt Donohue, was initially occupied with a separate review concerning a potential penalty after Enzo Fernández (the Brazilian midfielder) tackled Youri Tielemans. During that review, Oliver was already holding up the red card for Foden. Donohue can be heard asking, "Who has been sent off and for what?" as he tried to sort out the penalty question. Only after the penalty discussion was resolved did the VAR assistants draw his attention to Fernandes' kick.
The VAR conversation, captured in the broadcast, shows a back‑and‑forth about whether the ball was played by Enzo Fernández and whether a penalty should be awarded. Once that was settled, the focus shifted to the alleged "kick‑out" by Fernandes.
The assistant VAR asked, "Has he kicked him there?" and the main VAR responded that the incident appeared to be a clear case of violent conduct, prompting Oliver to confirm the red card for Foden. Throughout the exchange, the VAR officials repeatedly emphasized that they were checking the footage for a penalty first, and only later considered the disciplinary aspect of the Fernandes kick. Webb, speaking after the match, said he agreed with Oliver's decision to send Foden off. He described the kick as a forceful, upper‑body contact that met the threshold for violent conduct.
By contrast, Webb characterized Fernandes' earlier action as "petulant" rather than violent. He argued that the kick lacked the excessive force or brutality required for a red card, and that a yellow card would have been the appropriate sanction. However, Webb noted that VAR is not permitted to intervene to issue a caution; VAR can only advise on clear and obvious errors related to red‑card offences.
Since the referee had already issued the red card for Foden, the VAR system could not retroactively add a yellow for Fernandes. Webb further clarified the procedural limits of VAR. If the referee had missed the violent conduct entirely, VAR could have stepped in to recommend a red card for Foden and potentially a yellow for Fernandes.
But because the on‑field decision was already made, the VAR window closed for any additional disciplinary action. This nuance, Webb explained, is built into the system to avoid endless layers of review and to preserve the authority of the referee's immediate judgement. The incident drew commentary from Sky Sports analyst Laura Hunter, who highlighted the chaotic nature of the VAR review.
Hunter pointed out that Donohue seemed distracted by the earlier penalty check, which may have delayed the assessment of Fernandes' kick. She argued that the VAR team should have flagged the initial provocation more clearly, especially since it directly led to Foden's retaliation. According to Hunter, both players engaged in conduct that, under a consistent disciplinary framework, would merit similar punishment. The failure to book Fernandes, she suggested, represented a significant oversight and raised questions about the fairness of the decision‑making process.
Hunter also noted that the threshold for VAR intervention in subjective matters—such as determining whether a foul constitutes "violent conduct" versus a "petulant" gesture—has been deliberately set high. This policy aims to prevent the technology from becoming a tool for re‑refereeing the entire match, thereby preserving the flow of the game. Nonetheless, the grey area remains, and incidents like this illustrate the challenges officials face when trying to balance consistency with the practical limits of video review. In summary, Howard Webb defended the red card shown to Phil Foden, describing the kick as a clear case of violent conduct that warranted dismissal.
He simultaneously explained why Bruno Fernandes escaped a yellow card: his action, while ill‑judged, lacked the level of force required for a caution, and VAR is not authorized to issue a caution after the referee has already made a disciplinary decision. The episode underscores the complexities of modern officiating, where split‑second decisions, multiple video reviews, and strict procedural rules intersect.
It also fuels ongoing debate about whether VAR should have a broader remit to address all forms of misconduct, or whether its current constraints are necessary to protect the referee’s authority and the game's rhythm. The conversation continues among fans, pundits, and officials as they seek a balance between technological assistance and the human element of football officiating.