Professional Refereeing chief Howard Webb has publicly stood by the decision to dismiss Phil Foden during the Manchester derby, explaining that the on‑field referee’s red card was justified for violent conduct. At the same time, Webb clarified why the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system was unable to issue a yellow card to Manchester United captain Bruno Fernandes for the earlier, "petulant" kick that ignited the confrontation. The incident unfolded in Manchester City’s 1‑0 victory at Old Trafford. Early in the second half, City forward Phil Foden was brought down by the United captain after a challenge that appeared to be a foul.
In the heat of the moment, Foden responded with a forceful kick aimed at Fernandes’ upper body. The referee, Michael Oliver, immediately brandished a red card, signalling violent conduct.
Bruno Fernandes, however, escaped any sanction despite video evidence suggesting he had initiated the clash with a quick, somewhat reckless kick at Foden before the latter’s retaliation. The VAR team, led by Matt Donohue, was initially occupied with a separate review – a potential penalty claim stemming from Enzo Fernández’s challenge on Youri Tielemans. While Oliver was still holding up the red card, Donohue can be heard asking, "Who has been sent off and for what?" and then being prompted by his assistants to examine the earlier kick by Fernandes.
The VAR dialogue reveals the complexity of the situation. After confirming that Enzo Fernández had indeed played the ball and that no penalty was due, the officials turned their attention to the melee.
An assistant VAR officer described the incident as a "possible kick‑out" and asked, "Has he kicked him there?" The conversation continued with VAR confirming the absence of a penalty and then focusing on the violent conduct element. Ultimately, the VAR officials concurred with Oliver’s decision, stating, "That looks like a clear red card to me," and confirming the dismissal of Foden.
Webb later explained the reasoning behind his support for the red card. He noted that Foden’s kick was directed with force into Fernandes’ torso, meeting the criteria for violent conduct under the Laws of the Game.
By contrast, Fernandes’ earlier kick, while certainly ill‑judged, lacked the excessive force required for a red‑card offence. Webb described it as "more petulant than violent" and argued that, at most, it would merit a yellow card. Because VAR is not authorised to intervene to issue a caution that the on‑field referee missed, the system could not step in to punish Fernandes. Webb added, "If the referee had missed everything and no card had been shown to Foden, VAR could have intervened to assess a possible red for him and a yellow for Fernandes.
But once the referee has issued a red, VAR’s scope to change the decision is closed." This nuance underscores the procedural limits placed on VAR: it may only review incidents that the referee has either not acted upon or where a clear and obvious error is evident. In this case, the referee’s decision to send off Foden was deemed a clear on‑field call, leaving no room for VAR to alter the outcome. Sky Sports analyst Laura Hunter echoed many of Webb’s points, highlighting how the VAR room seemed distracted by the penalty review when the crucial kick‑out incident occurred.
She argued that the VAR team’s primary responsibility is to alert the referee to any missed offences, especially when those offences could affect the disciplinary balance of the match. Hunter pointed out that Fernandes’ initial kick was arguably the provocation, and that failing to sanction him created an apparent inconsistency: one player receives a red card for a kick, while the other walks away with nothing. Hunter further noted that the threshold for VAR intervention has been deliberately raised for subjective decisions, such as "violent conduct" versus "petulant" behaviour, to avoid constant re‑refereeing. While this approach reduces controversy over frequent overturns, it also leaves grey areas where similar actions receive different punishments.
In her view, the VAR room missed an opportunity to highlight the trigger for Foden’s retaliation, a detail that could have provided a fuller picture for the referee and the audience. The broader debate touches on the balance between maintaining the flow of the game and ensuring fairness. Webb’s stance reinforces the principle that the referee’s on‑field judgement is paramount, and VAR should only intervene when a clear mistake has been made. At the same time, the incident illustrates how quickly the narrative can shift when multiple infractions happen in rapid succession, and how the technology’s procedural rules can sometimes leave one side of a confrontation unpunished.
In summary, Howard Webb affirmed that Phil Foden’s dismissal was appropriate given the violent nature of his kick, while acknowledging that Bruno Fernandes’ earlier, less forceful kick did not meet the threshold for a red card and fell outside VAR’s remit for issuing cautions. The episode highlights the challenges VAR faces in real‑time decision‑making, especially when multiple incidents overlap, and it fuels ongoing discussion about whether the current guidelines strike the right balance between accuracy and game continuity.