ErrorKMI panel rulingPenaltyMinorGrumbles

Penalty not given for James Tarkowski holding Wesley Fofana

Saturday, 21 March 2026 · 2025-26 · —

What happened

Penalty not given for James Tarkowski holding Wesley Fofana. The KMI panel ruled the on-field decision wrong, but not a clear and obvious error, so VAR was right not to intervene.

On the pitch: Penalty not given for James Tarkowski holding Wesley Fofana
VAR: VAR confirmed
Benefited: EVE Everton
Harmed: CHE Chelsea

Fan verdict

Was the final decision right?

One tap, then pick your club. We show how Everton fans, Chelsea fans and everyone else answered.

Sources

Officials & their calls

RefereeSam BarrottErrorcareer on file: 11 err · 8%VARPaul HowardCorrectcareer on file: 1 err · 95%Assistant VARPeter WrightCorrectcareer on file: 1 err · 75%

What the fans thought

Grumbles23

8 of 579 comments in the r/soccer post-match thread were angry about the officiating, mostly from Chelsea fans. Main gripes: penalty and red card.

“despite Utd getting robbed yesterday by PGMOL, they still won today because they were able to sell Garnacho for 40m to Chelsea” · 434 upvotes

“United get f***ed by ref to keep the top4 battle close and yet gain 1 point on both Chelsea and Liverpool LOL” · 72 upvotes

Whole-match mood, not this incident alone.

Something wrong or missing?

This record is community-maintained. If there's a panel ruling, a better source or a correction, send it in.

Edit on GitHub Report a correction

What happened

Sources

Related incidents

Calafiori goal ruled out for Konsa offside

Kamada's first Palace goal ruled out for a razor-thin offside

DOGSO dismissal not given: challenge by Dunk on Pedro

Goal awarded: kostoulas in an onside position