Paris Saint-Germain’s 4-0 victory over Nice last Saturday in Matchday 27 of the 2025-2026 Ligue 1 season was notably marred by a controversy surrounding the refereeing. Nice players, especially coach Claude Puel, criticized the penalty awarded to PSG at the end of the first half. This Wednesday, the Refereeing Directorate released its analysis.
Is the controversy over?
Morgan Sanson placed his left arm in the path of the ball, in a position that increased the surface area covered by his body. The contact with the ball was confirmed and constituted an infringement of Law 12, justifying the penalty.
Furthermore, regardless of the lack of footage definitively confirming a “double contact” at the moment the corner kick was taken, the Refereeing Directorate (DRD) reiterates that, in accordance with the IFAB’s Video Assistant Referee (VAR) implementation protocol and with the exception of penalties, “a poorly executed restart resulting in a goal or a penalty cannot be reviewed” by the video assistant referee (VAR).
The answer is clear, unsurprising after the VAR review. It’s a penalty, since the arm is in the wrong position and there is contact between the hand and the ball. One could argue that it’s “unfair” because the shot didn’t appear to be on target, but the rule would quickly become complicated to apply if we start taking into account such factors, like the “danger” of the ball. Above all, there’s a defender who is poorly positioned. And the referee isn’t there for “football justice,” but to enforce the rules.
As for the infamous double contact, the answer is also clear. While it’s still regrettable that VAR is limited to certain situations, there’s also the difficulty of implementing it for everything and the potential disruption to the flow of matches.
