Howard Webb Backs Botman Yellow Card Decision Despite Pundit Outcry
Referees' chief Howard Webb has defended the decision not to send off Newcastle defender Sven Botman for his tackle on Aston Villa striker Nicolas Jackson, insisting VAR was correct not to intervene because the challenge was not "clearly wrong". The incident occurred in Newcastle's 1-0 defeat to Villa on Saturday.
- Match: Newcastle 0-1 Aston Villa (Premier League, Saturday)
- Incident: Sven Botman yellow card for tackle on Nicolas Jackson
- Referee: Jarred Gillett; VAR: Stuart Attwell
- Webb's view: No clear error, so VAR correctly stayed out
- Pundit view: Jamie Redknapp, Dermot Gallagher and Jay Bothroyd called for a red
What was said
"If VAR can't see that's a red, we're in trouble. It is so dangerous. How he's not broken his leg there... I like to see aggression. I want to see 50/50 tackles, but you can't do that anymore."
"The referee said it was a yellow card but it was so high. Hopefully next time it is a red card. I nearly broke my leg, but it's fine. It's part of football."
"I think it's a red card. It's got everything for a red card tackle - it's got speed, intensity, he scissors him."
"Botman is more violent conduct than the headbutt [from Yehor Yarmoliuk at Brentford]. He could have broken his leg."
"We've seen quite a lot of robust tackling in the Premier League. This weekend we saw quite a few examples of strong tackles going in; it's part of the English game, the Premier League and what people like. We want to embrace that but we also have a responsibility to ensure players' safety."
"Many of those situations that we've seen with those types of tackles are subjective - the referee's having to make a determination in the moment on how much force is used and the nature of the tackle."
"We've really tried to encourage referees this season to make decisive on-field decisions, and in this situation we see the referee make a judgement on Joelinton's tackle by playing advantage and then Botman comes in."
"The referee in the moment, on the ground, sees it as a reckless challenge - no doubt a high-end reckless challenge - as Botman comes in and gets a touch on the ball."
"There's obviously some speed he comes in with. The VAR looks at that decision and tries to identify whether that was clearly wrong."
"We don't want the referee's decision to be re-refereed by the VAR; we want the referee to have ownership of the decision and the VAR to only step in when there's an element that's clearly wrong."
"So if the VAR had seen strong stud contact from Botman's extended leg into the ankle or shin of Jackson, or there had been a closing of the scissor, I think we'd have probably come out with a different outcome after the VAR had looked at it."
"But he doesn't see that. He realises it's subjective, and he allows it to stay on the field with the referee's call standing."
"Equally, if that had been a red card, for sure it would've been check complete by the VAR as well."
"So, it's a good example really of how the referee's call is working in the Premier League this season. A lighter-touch approach: let the referees referee the decision and the VAR step in when there's something clearly really wrong."
"I don't like that. Right, so he hits the ball; he goes over the top of the ball. He doesn't go studs into the leg, but he goes round it with a scissor challenge."
"What are you thinking?"
"I think he plays the ball and there's limited contact with the player's leg."
"It's not with the studs, is it? It goes round him."
"It's not with the studs. It's not a clear point of contact."
"There's no secondary scissor action."
"Jarred, confirming yellow card for Sven Botman and confirming yellow card for Joelinton. Two reckless tackles."
"When players make contact with their head, they're running a really high risk. It's seen as a violent act."
"When we apply the laws of the game, we differentiate between the neck, face and head compared to contacts into the chest. For us not to send off for contact into the face or head, it has to be deemed negligible and in this case it's not."
"It's a fairly forceful act by Bentancur. You could argue the push by Shaw is also forceful but it's in the chest. You don't often see players sent off for pushes to the chest."
"A yellow card for Luke Shaw, but it has to be a red card for Bentancur reacting in the way he does with his head."
These quotes reveal a clear philosophical divide. Webb is doubling down on a lighter-touch VAR approach that prioritises the on-field referee's judgment, while several high-profile voices in the game believe the threshold for intervention is set too high when player safety is at risk.
Webb's explanation also highlights the fine margins in these decisions: the absence of strong stud contact or a secondary scissor action was enough for Attwell to confirm Gillett's original call.
The numbers
- 1-0 – the scoreline as Newcastle lost to Aston Villa
- 2 – yellow cards confirmed by VAR in the incident (Botman and Joelinton)
- 1 – red card upheld for Rodrigo Bentancur in Tottenham's 1-1 draw at Manchester United
- 1 – yellow card for Luke Shaw in the same match
Why Webb trusts the on-field call over VAR re-refereeing
Howard Webb is clear that the Premier League's VAR protocol this season is designed to avoid re-refereeing subjective decisions. In the Botman case, he argues that referee Jarred Gillett made a defensible judgment that the tackle was reckless but not violent, and that Stuart Attwell was correct not to intervene because there was no clear evidence of studs into the leg or a scissor action.
The pundits, including Jamie Redknapp, Dermot Gallagher and Jay Bothroyd, see it differently: they believe the speed and scissor motion made it a red-card offence regardless of ball contact. Nicolas Jackson's own comments underline the danger, yet Webb insists that if the VAR had seen strong stud contact or a closing scissor, the outcome would have changed.
This incident also fits a pattern: Webb confirmed that similar tackles by Morgan Rogers and Cole Palmer were not analysed on this week's Match Officials Mic'd Up, leaving those calls open to further debate.
Talking points
- Should player safety trump the "clear and obvious" error threshold? Webb says no, but Jackson's "nearly broke my leg" comment suggests the current approach leaves players vulnerable.
- Was Attwell's decision not to intervene a sign of consistency or a failure to protect players? The lack of stud contact was decisive, but many fans will argue the scissor motion alone warranted a red.
- Why were Morgan Rogers and Cole Palmer's tackles not addressed by Webb? The silence fuels suspicion that the PGMOL is picking its battles.
- Does the lighter-touch VAR approach actually reduce controversy, or does it simply shift anger towards referees' on-field calls?
What happens next
Howard Webb's comments are unlikely to end the debate, but they set the tone for the rest of the season. The next round of Premier League fixtures will bring more subjective tackle decisions, and referees will be under pressure to apply the same lenient standard. Meanwhile, the PGMOL is expected to continue its media outreach through Match Officials Mic'd Up, but the omission of the Rogers and Palmer incidents may invite further scrutiny.
Frequently asked questions
Why wasn't Sven Botman sent off for his tackle on Nicolas Jackson?
Referee Jarred Gillett gave a yellow card and VAR Stuart Attwell confirmed it, with Howard Webb later explaining that there was no clear evidence of studs into the leg or a scissor action to justify a red.
What did Howard Webb say about the Botman decision?
Webb said the VAR was right not to re-referee the on-field call because the challenge was not "clearly wrong", and he emphasised the need to let referees make decisive judgments.
Did Nicolas Jackson think it should have been a red card?
Yes, Jackson told Sky Sports: "The referee said it was a yellow card but it was so high. Hopefully next time it is a red card. I nearly broke my leg, but it's fine."
Related Articles
Filed under: Latest News | LA Premier League Home
