Myles Lewis-Skelly: PGMOL chief explains why red card decision was 'not horrendous' | OneFootball

Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) chief Howard Webb has admitted referee Michael Oliver was wrong to send Myles Lewis-Skelly off in Arsenal's 1-0 win over Wolverhampton Wanderers, but insisted the initial call was nowhere near as bad as many have claimed.

Lewis-Skelly was dismissed late in the first half after his attempt to stop a counter-attack was deemed to have been dangerously high. The Arsenal squad were apoplectic with rage - their protests earned them an enormous fine - while fans and pundits alike have slammed the decision.

The red card was eventually overturned after Arsenal's appeal, and while Webb acknowledged the sending off was incorrect, he defended Oliver's initial judgement.

"From the outset, we would prefer a yellow card in this situation," Webb told Match Officials Mic'd Up.

"Clearly the referee on the day felt the actions of Myles Lewis-Skelly... he saw the player moving in towards an opponent without any ability or intention of playing the ball - with the intention of stopping the opponent. And the referee sees a raised foot make high contact and the opponent went down.

"The referee felt it was serious foul play, the VAR checked the footage to see if the call was clearly and obviously wrong and he felt it wasn't - seeing that the contact was quite high up on the leg. But we know that for serious foul play, we need excessive force or brutality and what we see here is that high contact [just] glancing and coming off the leg quite quickly.

"So for that reason, everybody pretty much in the game has formed the same conclusion that this is falling short of serious foul play - because of that glancing contact. Because the studs don't really go right into the leg, they glance in before coming down onto the foot."

VAR audio in full

Oliver faced significant criticism for the decision / Naomi Baker/GettyImages

Referee: "I’m going to go red card, mate. Red card on the ankle. Red card, serious foul play."VAR: "Just checking the red card for serious foul play. OK, it’s for serious foul play, not DOGSO (Denying an Obvious Goalscoring Opportunity). OK, for me the contact's on the top of the foot."Assistant VAR: "I think he catches him on the side of the ankle first. It glances off the side of the ankle down onto the foot. So the first impact is more that Achilles area."VAR: "So first impact is on the Achilles, on the shin."Assistant VAR: "With no chance of playing the ball."VAR: "So, it’s high up above the ankle then it comes back down. OK, just get me the number please."Assistant VAR: "It’s number 49, Lewis-Skelly."VAR: "Michael, confirming the on-field decision of red card for serious foul play for Myles Lewis-Skelly. Away, 49. Check complete."

"There are some considerations that might support a red card, but there are a whole host of others that say it is not quite there, so on balance we would rather this had been a yellow card," Webb continued.

"The VAR didn't want to re-referee the situation, they were mindful of the referee's call standing unless it is clearly and obviously wrong. They felt it wasn't at that level on the day and decided to leave it as a red card on the field.

"I've heard this described as a really horrendous officiating decision. It's not! I understand why the referee saw this on the day as a serious foul-play action.

"We have to be careful about slowing things down and freeze-framing things. We've talked about not doing that, it can distort reality. We have to look at it in full speed, it is glancing [studs] and does come off quite quickly.

"But it's an understandable on-field decision. Yes we feel the VAR should have been involved, but at the same time I can kind of understand why that didn't happen in the moment.

"We listen to the game, we feed back to the officials to try to ensure that we are in line with the expectations of the game and how we judge these things."