Paul Scholes and Michael Owen disagree on Leeds penalty incident v Man United

Add as preferred source on Google

Leeds United kept a clean sheet against Man United on Sunday and stretched their unbeaten run to six games – and Michael Owen and Paul Scholes have disagreed on a potential penalty for Leeds, during Optus Sport’s coverage.

With United’s main focus now on the Europe League with second place more or less secured, United decided to rest the likes of Paul Pogba and Edinson Cavani. Leeds were not the Leeds many now expect, under Marcelo Bielsa.

Instead of their normal, attacking style, Leeds proved defensively resolute. The defence of Luke Ayling, Diego Llorente, Pascal Struijk and Gjanni Alioski were excellent as Illan Meslier kept a tenth clean sheet of the season.

During the first half, though, Leeds could have had a penalty as a cross floated on to the left arm of Luke Shaw. VAR looked at it but not for long, with the decision not deemed clear and obvious – and Owen and Scholes have disagreed.

Owen: “I think it will split a lot of people. Maguire and Bamford are in front of it, it has hit his arm not denying it. But there’s no intent there, I don’t think it’s a penalty but I wouldn’t have been surprised if it was given.

Scholes: “I disagree, I think it’s a penalty. He’s got plenty of time, he’s seen the ball coming. Bamford is nowhere near it, he’s got plenty of time to get his arm out of the way. He knows what he’s doing, prevents a clear chance for Costa.”

TBR’s view – The fact the duo disagree, shows it was not C&O

As the rules state, it needs to be clear and obvious for VAR to suggest to the man in the middle to check the monitor. It probably is not as black and white as some decisions have been this season and that is why it is not overturned.

But it does come a long way as Scholes suggests and he does somewhat move in the direction of the ball. But as per the current guidelines, it was right not to award the penalty. But are the rules right?

If this is shown to those working at Stockley Park, the majority would state that this is a penalty. Should the original decision affect what VAR rules? There needs to be a complete re-think of the way in which it operates.