VAR Expert Explains Why Liverpool’s Mac Allister Didn’t Concede Penalty vs Palace

Crystal Palace walked away from Wembley with pride after their dramatic Community Shield victory over Liverpool, yet a storm of controversy still lingers around one pivotal moment. In the dying stages of normal time, Alexis Mac Allister appeared to handle the ball inside the box — but no penalty was awarded. Now, a Premier League rules expert has stepped forward to explain why the decision stood.

The match itself was a thrilling back-and-forth. Despite Liverpool’s dominance in possession and multiple scoring chances squandered by Mohamed Salah and Harvey Elliott, Palace stayed resilient. Hugo Ekitike and Jeremie Frimpong both found the net for the Reds, but each time they scored, Jean-Philippe Mateta and Ismaila Sarr hit back to keep the game level.

The decisive moment of regulation time came in the 79th minute. With both teams desperate to find a winner before penalties, Palace swung in a dangerous cross. Mac Allister leapt to intercept — and missed the ball entirely. Instead, it struck his raised arm, stopping it from reaching Sarr, who was lurking in a prime scoring position.

Referee Chris Kavanagh was immediately surrounded by Palace players demanding a penalty. The VAR, Paul Tierney, conducted a thorough review, but Kavanagh’s original call stood. The play continued, leaving Palace’s bench furious and their supporters in disbelief.

The question was simple: why wasn’t it a penalty? To answer that, ESPN’s Dale Johnson, a recognised authority on football’s laws, shed light on how the Premier League applies the handball rule compared to other major leagues. His insight revealed just how differently England interprets these incidents.

According to Johnson, the Premier League has adopted a far stricter threshold for awarding handball penalties. Last season, only nine such penalties were given in England’s top flight — a stark contrast to La Liga’s 28. In England, VAR intervenes only when the player is facing the play, the arm is clearly extended away from the body, or the act is deemed deliberate.

He explained that Mac Allister’s situation fell outside these criteria. The Argentine was in mid-air, with his arms positioned as part of a natural jumping motion. Importantly, his gaze wasn’t fixed on the ball, and the arm in question was behind his body rather than in front of it — factors that leaned heavily towards the incident being classified as accidental.

“Far more importance has been put on a player’s body movement,” Johnson wrote. “If they are jumping, they would be expected to have a raised arm. If the ball had hit Mac Allister’s left arm in front of him while he was watching the ball, it would have been a stronger claim for a penalty.”

The ruling boiled down to the interpretation of intent and positioning. Because Mac Allister could plausibly argue that his arm’s position was part of a natural leap and not a deliberate attempt to block the cross, both Kavanagh and Tierney concluded it did not meet the threshold for a spot-kick.

Palace fans will argue that rules or no rules, the contact denied Sarr a clear chance to score. Liverpool supporters, on the other hand, will point to the consistency of England’s handball interpretations. What is certain is that the debate will rage on long after the final whistle.

In the end, the penalty never came, and Palace went on to win the shootout after Justin Devenny’s ice-cold finish sealed the trophy. Yet for many neutrals, the incident will remain the defining “what if” moment of the 2025 Community Shield — a reminder that in football, the line between fair play and controversy can be razor-thin.