Premier League Match Round 4 - Key Match Incidents Panel outcomes

The Key Match Incidents (KMI) Panel provides an independent assessment of key decisions in every Premier League match.

During the 2026/27 season, the Premier League is publishing the results of its KMI Panel weekly on our website and app, providing full transparency around the evaluation of decisions made by Match Officials.

Across Match Round 4, there were 19 Referee KMIs, with the panel deeming 95 per cent of on-field decisions to be correct. Following VAR intervention, 100 per cent of Referee decisions were deemed correct.

There was one VAR overturn, which the panel concluded was an incorrect intervention. This is recorded as both an on-field Assistant Referee error and an incorrect outcome post-VAR.

Over the 2026/27 season, there have been 79 referee KMIs, with the panel deeming that 89 per cent of on-field decisions have been correct. This compares to 86 per cent at the corresponding stage last season. Following VAR intervention, 97 per cent of decisions were deemed correct.

Selected topics, incidents and outcomes from the KMI Panel are highlighted below, with the full document containing all KMIs from Match Round 4 linked at the bottom of this article.

Incident: KMI Goal not awarded. Erling Haaland in an onside position, Enzo Fernandez in an offside position (60min)

On-field decision outcome: Incorrect - Fernandez impacting opponent (0 votes in support of on-field decision; 5 votes against)

VAR intervention outcome: Incorrect - clear and obvious error (0:5)

KMI Panel: The panel unanimously felt that the VAR intervention to award the goal was incorrect. Fernandez is in an offside position, attempts to play the ball that is close to him, and impacts the ability of the defenders and the goalkeeper to play the ball in the process. A VAR review should have been recommended for a missed subjective offside in the attacking possession phase.

What are the considerations for an offside offence when interfering with an opponent?

More information on offside can be found from page 78 of the Premier League and Pro Ref Competition Guidance Handbook.

See what Howard Webb, the Chief Refereeing Officer of Pro Ref, said about the decision-making process for this incident on the most recent episode of Match Officials Mic’d Up.

Incident: Penalty awarded. Challenge by Ezri Konsa on Dan Ballard (54 min)

On-field decision outcome: Incorrect (0:5)

VAR intervention outcome: Correct - not a clear and obvious error (3:2)

KMI Panel: The non-VAR intervention was supported, by three votes to two, with the majority considering that the on-field decision was not a clear and obvious error, given the combined actions from both players.

How can the KMI panel vote that the on-field decision was incorrect, but that the VAR was correct not to intervene?

Panellists assess the Referee’s decision first, before considering the VAR’s actions. It is also important to note that the Premier League operates with a high threshold for VAR intervention.

In this instance, the panel concluded that, although the Referee made an error and should not have awarded a penalty kick, the decision did not meet the threshold for a clear and obvious error. Therefore, it was not deemed a situation in which the VAR should have intervened.

Incident: Sending-off dismissal given. Challenge by Taiwo Awoniyi on Maxim De Cuyper (52 min)

On-field decision outcome: Correct (5:0)

KMI Panel: The on-field call of a red card for violent conduct against Awoniyi was supported. Awoniyi is not challenging for the ball and makes a striking action with his arm that makes contact with the face of his opponent.

VAR intervention outcome: Correct - not a clear and obvious error (5:0)

What is violent conduct?

The Laws of the Game state that violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.

More information on violent conduct can be found below from page 96 of the Premier League and Pro Ref Competition Guidance Handbook.

How did the Referee come to this decision?

During Premier League matches, Referees, Assistant Referees and the Fourth Official use wireless communication systems to ensure fair play, apply the Laws of the Game and manage the flow of the match.

Assistant Referees and the Fourth Official therefore play an important role in supporting the Referee’s decision-making. As match officials are positioned in different areas of the pitch, they will often have different viewing angles and may see details of an incident that others cannot. This collaborative approach helps the Referee reach the most accurate outcome possible.

In this instance, Assistant Referee 1 had a clear view of the challenge by Awoniyi on De Cuyper and clearly communicated what he saw to the Referee. The Premier League Match Centre clarification below includes quotes from the conversation that led to the red card being awarded.

#COVBHA – 53’

The referee’s call of red card to Awoniyi for violent conduct was checked and confirmed by VAR.

AR1: “He has caught him in the face with his elbow”.

REF: “The final decision is red card for violent conduct”.

VAR: “There’s a movement. Confirming the on-field…

You can read our FAQ on the KMI Panel, which explains what the panel is, how it operates and what the results mean.

Full KMI Panel Decisons for Match Round 4 (Download PDF, 211KB)