The Premier League’s Key Match Incidents (KMI) Panel has supported the decision to award a Manchester United goal against Ipswich, despite a contentious handball involving Harry Maguire, although one panellist believed the use of the arm was deliberate.
During United's 5-2 victory on 30 August, the ball appeared to strike Maguire’s hand as he brought it under control outside the 18-yard box. His subsequent shot was heading off-target before diverting into the net via Ipswich defender Jacob Greaves.
Match official Craig Pawson and VAR Jarred Gillett determined the handball to be accidental. Under current regulations, because Maguire did not score directly from his shot, the goal was permitted to stand.
Composed of three former players or coaches, a Premier League official, and a representative from Pro Ref, the independent panel is publishing its assessments of key match-week decisions for the first time this season.
In notes released on Wednesday morning, the panel stated: "Maguire’s arms are within his bodyline, meaning that the contact with his right arm was accidental and not a punishable handball offence given that Maguire was not the goal scorer.
"The shot was clearly off-target and then deflected in via the defender for a clear own goal. The panel supported the referee’s call to award the goal, 4:1, with one panellist considering the handball to be deliberate."
Following the fixture, the Premier League’s Match Centre account on X explained: "The referee’s call of goal for Manchester United was checked and confirmed by VAR – with it deemed that Maguire was not the immediate goalscorer after an accidental handball."
It added a statement from the VAR: "It’s an own goal and the accidental handball is not punishable, so we recommend you award the goal."
Elsewhere, the panel concluded that VAR should have stepped in to grant Arsenal a penalty during their match at Aston Villa on 31 August for Ian Maatsen’s challenge on Bruno Guimaraes. Although no foul was given during play, the panel unanimously agreed a penalty should have been awarded, either on the pitch or following a review.
"Clear contact was made on the attacker’s standing leg and Maatsen made no contact with the ball," the panel notes read.
"They also felt that VAR should have intervened as the non-penalty award was a clear and obvious error."
The panel also viewed Maatsen’s "reckless" challenge as worthy of a second caution.
Regarding Nottingham Forest’s penalty at Liverpool on 29 August for Alisson Becker’s challenge on Neco Williams, the panel disagreed 3-2 with the on-field award. However, members felt VAR was right not to intervene as it did not reach the clear and obvious error threshold.
A 4-1 majority also disagreed with the decision not to award Brentford a penalty at Leeds on the same date following Jayden Bogle’s challenge on Kevin Schade. Again, the panel felt it lacked the threshold required for VAR to overturn the call.
In total, 21 Key Match Incidents were evaluated from the second match round. Initial on-field decision accuracy stood at 76 per cent, rising to 90 per cent following VAR interventions.
Read MoreWhy the Premier League still can’t bully Europe’s giants in the Champions League
Is Man United v Sabah on TV? How to watch Champions League fixtures
Joe Willock steers Newcastle past Millwall to avoid Carabao Cup shock
Nicolas Jackson’s first Aston Villa goal caps welcome night for Unai Emery
Carragher tips Haaland to achieve historic milestone after Champions League double
Mourinho delivers blunt review of Trent Alexander-Arnold’s midfield role for Madrid
