The Whistle: Round 17 refereeing and VAR incidents explained

Each week will be speaking with FFA Director of Referees Ben Wilson to review some of the contentious refereeing and VAR incidents from the weekend’s matches.

STATS REVIEW: Penalty king Redmayne closes in on Hyundai A-League record
HOW TO WATCH: All five Hyundai A-League games in Round 18
WATCH FOR FREE: How to watch the Hyundai A-League LIVE and FREE 

New free to air banner

Ben, there were three red cards in Adelaide on Saturday night, can you talk us through the first one involving Ken Ilso?

In this incident, after losing possession of the ball Ken Ilso tackles Matt McKay. Ilso makes strong contact with his studs to McKay’s leg, below the knee.

The referee decides that this tackle endangers the safety of the opponent.

The referee has a clear view and sends Ilso from the field for Serious Foul Play. The referee’s coaching panel supports the referee’s decision to send the player off.

In the same match Brisbane had a goal initially disallowed for offside, what was the process for that decision?

In this incident, the Assistant Referee’s decision was that Henrique was offside. After Henrique scores the goal, the Assistant Referee raises the flag and the referee blows the whistle.

As a goal has been scored and play had not been stopped, it is within protocol for the VAR to check the incident. The VAR checked the incident and determined that the offside decision was clearly wrong.

As this is an objective decision, there is no need for the referee to do an on-field review. The referee should have shown the TV signal to indicate that a review had taken place and then immediately awarded the goal based on the advice of the VAR.

After review, the goal was correctly awarded.

At Central Coast a goal was allowed despite a potential offside offence, what happened there?

In this incident after a goal area scramble, Kenny Athiu chips the ball over Ben Kennedy towards the goal. Elvis Kamsoba is in an offside position, however he did not interfere with play or with an opponent.

He did not challenge Kennedy for the ball or make an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of Kennedy to play the ball.

The VAR checked the incident and agreed that Kamsoba did not commit an offence and the on-field decision was upheld.