Wolves suffered a controversial late defeat on Monday night as Fulham came out as 3-2 victors at Craven Cottage.
The hosts were awarded a debatable penalty in the 94th minute after VAR had advised the on-field referee to go to the monitor. Willian then took the opportunity to score the winner.
However, this wasn’t the only controversial incident. Fulham went ahead earlier in the game thanks to another penalty which was quickly dispatched by the Brazilian Winger.
Wolves also had a penalty themselves after Hwang Hee-Chan was brought down inside the area and converted to make it 2-2.
However, the late drama ended up deciding the result with VAR once again costing Gary O’Neil’s side this season.
While both the Wolves manager and captain Max Kilman thought that the referee had made multiple mistakes during the match, Fulham manager Marco Silva seemed to disagree.
Marco Silva agrees with the final penalty decision
After the game, the Fulham manager was asked for his take on the three penalties.
Looking back on the incidents, he deemed both Fulham’s first and Wolves’ penalties as ‘soft’.
However, Silva insisted that the referee came to the right decision for the host’s winner.
“The only clear penalty is the second [Fulham] one,” said Silva on London News Online. “It was a clear foul on Harry Wilson by the Wolves player.
“The first for us and the one for them is a little bit soft.
“I didn’t see all of the images. VAR have all of the technology to decide.
“The only penalty that the referee didn’t see was the clearest one. VAR had to help on that one.”
Fulham’s penalty should have been overturned
How the referee and VAR have managed to give Fulham both penalties is laughable.
In the first incident, Nelson Semedo clearly makes contact with the ball with minimum contact coming between the full-back and Tom Cairney. However, after reviewing the footage, VAR upheld the on-field decision.
Then for the second penalty, after Joao Gomes makes contact with the Fulham attacker, the referee didn’t initially give a spot kick. However, after a long VAR review and a monitor review another late penalty was given against Wolves.
If VAR and Howard Webb insist on using ‘clear and obvious’ terminology, surely both penalties cannot be given.
The first clearly isn’t a penalty. Semedo makes contact with the ball but VAR has clearly viewed this at the time as not a ‘clear and obvious mistake’.
Yet, VAR intervened late on to give Fulham a chance to win the game. If the on-field referee isn’t giving that as a penalty, it is hard to see how it is a ‘clear and obvious error’.
This is evident post-match, with many pundits, players and managers still debating whether this should have been given or not.
In regards to Wolves’ penalty, it is the most clear and obvious of the night. The fact that PGMOL came out after and said Tim Ream should have received a second yellow for the challenge only confirms this.