Article by Adrian Duţă – Published on Wednesday, 05 November 2025, 00:07 / Updated on Wednesday, 05 November 2025 00:20
Liverpool – Real Madrid 1-0. Istvan Kovacs was the star of the first half at Anfield, with the decision made after half an hour of play. The Spaniards and the English reacted immediately, after the performance of the Romanian.
In the 30th minute, Kovacs gave Liverpool a free kick on the edge of the box. He considered Tchouameni to have fouled when he deflected Szoboszlai's shot.
The Romanian was called to the monitor, because the VAR referees saw that the action took place in the box. He then analyzed the phase and decided that the Frenchman had not committed a foul. If he thought it was punishable, he would have given a penalty, because it happened on the 16-meter line.
What the English write about Istvan Kovacs' decision
“He's trying to block with his torso. Arms aren't too far apart. Good call”former Liverpool defender Stephen Warnock told BBC Radio.
Although the former footballer believes that it was not a penalty, the English journalists did not agree.
“WOW! The ref decided it wasn't a foul at all. So Madrid got the ball. Especially in Europe, that's very strange,” wrote the Daily Mail.
“No penalty! Wow! Liverpool think they have a penalty but the referee says Tchouameni's handball is outside the box. He goes to check and then gives a shot from the edge of the box, apparently not believing the midfielder touched the ball with his hand. Unbelievable,” wrote the Liverpool Echo.
“Istvan Kovacs misses the penalty and cancels the free-kick! Really?” wrote the BBC of Kovacs' decision.
What the Spaniards say. Two former referees reacted
“The position of the arm is evaluated, if it is open enough to increase the surface of the body or if it is a natural movement. The distance and force of the shot are also evaluated. It is an interpretable phase.
My opinion leans more towards the penalty because both arms are open where the ball goes through”said former referee Pérez Burrull on the “Marcador Europeo” show on Radio MARCA.
“They saw on VAR that the phase happened inside the box, so it was a penalty if it was considered a handball. But those in the VAR room did not consider it a penalty and that's why they called Kovács. He reviewed the phase, determined that Tchouaméni's hand was inside the box and that, therefore, the foul should not be awarded, because it was not a handball”, wrote Marca.
“The hand was stuck if it was behind his back. It's a very unclear phase where, after seeing it again, he decided it wasn't, but if he whistles it, you have to accept it.
The VAR doesn't need to check if it's in or out, that should be automatic. If it is called, it is to assess whether it is a foul, not whether it is in or out of the box“, explained Iturralde González, former referee, for AS.
The standings in the Champions League
