Professional Referees chief Howard Webb has stood by the decision to dismiss Phil Foden during the Manchester derby, explaining that the on‑field referee’s red card was justified. At the same time, Webb pointed out that the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system was unable to intervene to issue a caution to Bruno Fernandes for the earlier, arguably "petulant" kick that ignited the confrontation. The incident unfolded in Manchester City’s 1‑0 victory at Old Trafford.
After being brought down by United captain Bruno Fernandes, Foden reacted by swinging his leg at Fernandes. The referee, Michael Oliver, interpreted the action as violent conduct and produced a straight red card, sending the young England international off the pitch. Video footage shows that the sequence began with Fernandes delivering a sharp kick toward Foden’s backside, an action many observers described as a petulant, retaliatory gesture rather than a forceful, dangerous strike. The kick was not deemed severe enough to constitute violent conduct, and under the current Laws of the Game it would normally merit only a yellow card.
However, VAR is not permitted to award a caution retroactively; its remit is limited to correcting clear and obvious errors, typically involving goals, penalties, or red‑card offences. Because the referee had already issued a red card for Foden, VAR could not step in to add a yellow card for Fernandes. The VAR review was further complicated by a separate incident involving Manchester United midfielder Enzo Fernández and Belgium’s Youri Tielemans.
While the VAR team was initially focused on determining whether Fernández’s challenge warranted a penalty, they were simultaneously asked to clarify who had been sent off and for what reason. Matt Donohue, the lead VAR official, can be heard asking, "Who has been sent off and for what?" as the on‑field referee was still holding up the red card.
After the penalty question was resolved – the officials concluded that Enzo Fernández had indeed played the ball and that no penalty should be awarded – the VAR assistants turned their attention to the earlier kick by Fernandes. Their analysis concluded that the strike was more of a petulant jab than a violent act, lacking the excessive force required for a red‑card offence.
Consequently, they advised that the appropriate sanction would have been a caution, but, as Webb explained, VAR cannot impose a yellow card after the fact when a red card has already been shown for a separate incident. Webb’s comments highlighted the procedural constraints that govern VAR interventions. He noted that the on‑field referee’s decision to send Foden off was clear and that the video evidence supported the view that Foden’s kick was a forceful strike to the upper body of Fernandes, fitting the definition of violent conduct. By contrast, Fernandes’s earlier kick, while unsporting, did not reach the threshold of violence; it was deemed "petulant" rather than "brutal" and therefore would have attracted only a yellow card under normal circumstances.
The chief operating officer also clarified a hypothetical scenario: if the referee had missed the entire incident and taken no action against Foden, VAR would have been empowered to intervene and recommend a red card for violent conduct, while also flagging Fernandes’s kick for a potential yellow. Because the red card was already issued, that avenue was closed, leaving Fernandes unpunished. Sky Sports analyst Laura Hunter offered a critical perspective on the whole episode. She argued that the VAR room’s focus on the penalty question distracted the officials from fully assessing the initial provocation by Fernandes.
Hunter suggested that the VAR’s primary role is to alert the referee to any missed infractions, especially when those infractions could have influenced the on‑field decision. In her view, the failure to scrutinise Fernandes’s kick represented a missed opportunity for consistency, as both players performed a similar act – a kick directed at an opponent’s lower body – yet only one was punished with a red card. Hunter also emphasized the broader policy context: VAR is deliberately limited in its capacity to overturn subjective calls to avoid the perception of "re‑refereeing" matches. This approach creates a grey area where decisions may appear inconsistent, but it is intended to preserve the flow of the game and respect the authority of the on‑field officials.
In summary, Howard Webb defended the red card shown to Phil Foden as a correct application of the rules regarding violent conduct. He explained that VAR’s hands were tied when it came to disciplining Bruno Fernandes for his earlier, less severe kick, because VAR cannot issue a yellow card after a red has already been handed out.
The incident sparked debate among pundits about the balance between maintaining consistency and limiting VAR interference, highlighting the ongoing challenges of integrating technology into football officiating. The episode serves as a reminder that while VAR can correct clear mistakes, it is not a catch‑all solution for every on‑field incident. Referees must make split‑second judgments, and the technology is designed to support, not replace, those judgments. As the sport continues to evolve, discussions like these will shape future guidelines on how and when VAR should intervene in matters of player conduct.