'Very difficult' - Dermot Gallagher issues verdict on contentious moment in Leeds clash vs Chelsea

The young winger was caught by Ben Chilwell during the Whites’ 3-1 defeat at Stamford Bridge over the weekend, but stayed on his feet and tried to play on.

The incident subsequently passed without intervention from the referee or his video assistant.

Chilwell’s challenge closely mirrored a similar tackle from Liverpool defender Andy Robertson on Brighton forward Danny Welbeck a week prior.

Like Poveda, Welbeck stayed on his feet, but in that instance, VAR flagged up the contact and a spot-kick was awarded.

Speaking on Sky Sports News’ Football Show, Gallagher suggested that had Poveda gone to ground, he may well have garnered more sympathy from referee Kevin Friend.

“I think this is very difficult to explain”, the former top flight official said.

“I’ve revisited the protocols to try to have a look at this. What I will say is that if he [Poveda] goes down the referee has got a different decision to make, there’s no doubt about that.

"Referees need to be aware that sometimes a foul can be committed and a player stops on his feet.

“What I would also say is that I think VAR was wise to stop out of this. Since the incident last week, with Welbeck and Robertson, I went through the protocol and looked. The protocol says that VAR is not there to decide whether the ref has got it right or wrong. It’s there to make a judgement on whether a player, a manager, a coach, a spectator in unison would say, ‘That’s definitely wrong, it’s a clear and obvious error’.

“I would say on that basis, it has to be left to the referee on the field.

"Because Poveda stopped on his feet, the referee made a different decision. We’ll never know, if he’d gone down the referee might still have made the same decision. He may well have made a different decision.

“But, on the evidence of what I saw on Saturday, and on the protocol I went through, the VAR has no right to intervene. It has to be the referee’s decision on the field.”

Gallagher was then asked whether the incident was the same as the foul on Welbeck seven days earlier.

“It was,” he said.

“There was a subtle difference insomuch that last week, the two players were in isolation, so there was a camera which showed a different angle that the referee didn’t have. You could see the kick by Robertson onto Welbeck.

“I think with this one, there’s a number of players in the penalty area, and they haven't got the same facilities. On that basis, the only angle VAR has got is the same angle as the referee, and my reasoning there is that he can’t say the referee has made a clear and obvious error at that point because he’s looking at exactly the same thing the referee is looking at.

“At Brighton, the VAR had the facility to look at the other side, which when you analyse it, you can make the case for a penalty. On this one, I don’t think you can.”