Frank Lampard Claims VAR Failed Its Job After Three Controversial Reviews Against Coventry

Coventry City manager Frank Lampard has accused Video Assistant Referees of failing to perform their role after three controversial reviews went against his side in a 3-1 defeat to Everton. The match, played on Friday Night Football, saw VAR officials Timothy Wood and Gary Beswick review two penalty appeals and a potential handball incident without awarding anything to the visitors.

Referee Stuart Attwell also declined to award penalties on the pitch for both appeals, leaving Lampard visibly frustrated with the officiating decisions. Despite opening the scoring after the initial appeals, Coventry were ultimately beaten on Merseyside as Everton secured a comfortable victory.

Lampard addressed the controversy directly in his post-match interview, expressing his disappointment with the lack of intervention from the technology. He stated: “I hate to sound like a moaner. It’s a football match and if you win the game, that can happen here.

I’ve worked here and know the momentum swings in the game.

The former Chelsea manager continued: “I’m not trying to talk about the circumstances of the actual football, but when big decisions change games, they absolutely do. It’s disappointing. VAR is there for that and it didn’t do its job.

The first major incident occurred towards the end of the first half when Everton defender James Tarkowski rose to defend a high ball into the box. As he did, he caught Coventry’s Ethan Pinnock with an elbow before appearing to pull the hair of Caleb Yirenkyi.

VAR reviewed the incident, focusing particularly on the elbow strike, but no card or penalty was issued. There was no communication from the Premier League Match Centre confirming whether the hair pull was specifically reviewed.

New guidance from the Premier League this summer states: “A red card will be issued when there is a clear and deliberate action to pull an opponent’s hair with excessive force and/or brutality.

The guidance further explains: “A yellow card will be issued if the action is deemed to be without excessive force and/or brutality. Referees will enhance recognition of clear holding actions that have a clear material impact.

Sky Sports pundit Jamie Redknapp offered his perspective on the incident during the broadcast. He said: “Yirenkyi goes up, Tarkowski gets hold of his hair. He yanks it down.

Is it excessive force? Probably not, but he pulls his hair, stopping any elevation. It’s a definite penalty for me.

Redknapp added: “Yirenkyi knows he has his hair pulled. It’s unusual for Tarkowski to do. It’s not the best piece of defending that’s for sure…

It’s a foul. It’s not a red card anymore but it’s definitely a foul.

Co-commentator Lee Hendrie also weighed in on the decision. He noted: “There’s a clear pull… Tarkowski is in the heart of this.

There’s an elbow, which isn’t a problem, but the hair pull will raise awareness.

Hendrie continued: “You can clearly see he’s utilising the hair. It’s a tight one. VAR have completely not looked at it or felt the need to look at it.

Everton manager David Moyes responded to the criticism, acknowledging the contentious nature of the decisions. He told Sky Sports: “I’m bothered because we want it [the result] to be right, but we’ve had a few decisions recently where we don’t think have gone our way.”

Moyes referenced past incidents, stating: “There was one possibly at Newcastle but there was one at Man City last season in a league game which was hugely important for us regarding getting into Europe.

He concluded his thoughts on refereeing: “Sometimes they go for you, sometimes they don’t. If they were going against me, I’d be complaining a bit more.

The second penalty appeal came at the start of the second half when Taiwo Awoniyi drove into the box with Vitalii Mykolenko behind him. Contact from behind sent the striker down, but referee Stuart Attwell said no penalty.

The VAR review deemed the contact to be outside the box, a decision Lampard strongly contested. He said: “I thought the one on Taiwo running through – it’s a clear foul that the referee doesn’t give in-game. I can’t believe that because it’s clear.

Lampard elaborated: “Maybe he waited for VAR because it was on the borderline. But as I see it, Taiwo’s foot is entering the box and his knee and the back of his knee is on the line of the box, which is a penalty.

He added: “It’s a definite penalty and it’s rubbish from the VAR. It’s a poor decision. It’s a definite foul, they rush it too quickly, and his foot’s on the line.

Lampard insisted: “VAR said it was outside the box – but it’s on the line. If you’re in the line, you’re in the box.

Pundits also disagreed with the VAR decision on this incident. One commentator noted: “Awoniyi puts his right foot across and then Mykolenko just gets him. It’s a definite foul and goes over.

Mykolenko goes over as well.

They added: “Just take a breather, tell the referee to have a look at it and he will have come to a different conclusion.

The final controversial moment involved a question of handball before Thierno Barry’s second goal, which gave Everton the lead. Barry bundled home from Tyrique George’s cross, with the ball bouncing wildly.

VAR checked the goal, but there was no conclusive evidence of a handball, allowing the goal to stand. This decision effectively sealed Everton’s victory in a match marked by significant officiating debates.