Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
2026 FIFA World Cup
25JUL

VAR orders Kane penalty retake in Dallas

2 min read
11:57UTC

VAR ordered Harry Kane's penalty retaken under IFAB Law 14 after Croatia's goalkeeper left his line, the tournament's second video-officiating row in four days.

SportDeveloping
Key takeaway

VAR ordered Kane's penalty retaken for goalkeeper and defender encroachment, the tournament's second video-officiating dispute in four days.

Harry Kane's first penalty against Croatia, a 12th-minute spot kick, was saved by Dominik Livakovic and then ordered to be retaken 1. VAR, the Video Assistant Referee system that reviews on-field decisions, ruled the goalkeeper had moved off his line before contact and that a Croatian defender had encroached into the area early. Both breach IFAB Law 14, the rule on penalty procedure written by the International Football Association Board, football's lawmaking body. Kane converted the retake.

VAR had been at the centre of a separate row four days earlier. On 14 June, FIFA withheld the offside graphic during Qatar's stoppage-time equaliser against Switzerland, leaving broadcasters and the crowd without an explanation for three hours and drawing a live rebuke from Gary Neville . That incident hid the evidence from view; the Kane retake acted on it openly, two video interventions of opposite character inside one week.

The expanded referee toolkit at this World Cup, from second-yellow reviews to encroachment retakes, keeps changing match outcomes faster than FIFA explains the reasoning behind each call. Kane's retake was correct under the letter of Law 14. Whether viewers accept a system that overturns a saved penalty depends less on the rule than on whether the governing body shows its working, and on Wednesday's evidence FIFA did so unevenly.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Football's penalty rules (IFAB Law 14) require the goalkeeper to stay on the goal line until the ball is kicked, and all other players to remain outside the penalty area until that moment. In England vs Croatia on 17 June, Croatia's goalkeeper Dominik Livakovic moved forward before Kane kicked the ball, and a Croatian defender stepped into the box before the save. A video review system called VAR (Video Assistant Referee) spotted both breaches, so the referee ordered the penalty to be retaken. This is the second major VAR controversy of the tournament. A few days earlier, FIFA failed to show the video replay when they checked an offside call in Switzerland vs Qatar {{EVREF:/t/2026-fifa-world-cup/20/fifas-hidden-var-graphic-ignites-row/}}, causing widespread confusion. Both incidents illustrate how VAR creates its own controversies when enforcement is inconsistent or unexplained.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The root cause is a governance gap between IFAB's rule text and on-pitch enforcement. Law 14's goalkeeper movement restriction existed in some form since the 1990s but was rarely enforced without VAR because officials could not reliably judge timing and position simultaneously. VAR's semi-automated tracking closed that gap technically, but FIFA only mandated systematic enforcement at the 2026 World Cup under new IFAB protocols agreed in 2024.

The second encroachment by a Croatian field player adds a layer. Law 14 also prohibits outfield players from entering the penalty area before the kick. VAR caught both violations simultaneously, which is the compound trigger for the retake rather than either infringement in isolation.

What could happen next?
  • Precedent

    The retake signals that Law 14 encroachment will be enforced systematically at this tournament, changing how goalkeepers and coaching staff prepare for penalties.

  • Risk

    Two significant VAR controversies in four days risk eroding broadcast audience trust in match officiating at a tournament FIFA has positioned as the most-watched in history.

First Reported In

Update #22 · Firsts and lasts: a record-day collision

ESPN· 18 Jun 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
Real Madrid
Real Madrid
Operating internally on the basis Rodri joins, according to David Ornstein's reporting, despite no talks having taken place with Manchester City. The gap between internal planning and actual negotiation is itself notable.
Manchester City
Manchester City
Unwilling to sell Rodri, with manager Enzo Maresca stating he returns to the club after back surgery. No club-to-club talks with Real Madrid are taking place, contradicting the framing of a deal in motion.
CONMEBOL
CONMEBOL
Backs the move to a 64-team 2030 tournament co-hosted across South America. Has not engaged publicly with FIFPRO's workload or heat-threshold objections drawn from this tournament's data.
FIFA
FIFA
Points to its 30 June technical and officiating reviews as the authoritative account of the tournament's football, including Collina's rejection of bias claims. Has not publicly responded to the renewed compensation call or disputed FIFPRO's heat-threshold figures.
FIFPRO
FIFPRO
Measures a four-degree gap between its own 28C postponement threshold and FIFA's 32C cooling-break trigger, breached in 19% of matches played. Cites a 70-83 match workload projection to oppose the 64-team 2030 format.
Human Rights Watch
Human Rights Watch
Documents 54 immigration-custody deaths before kickoff and two since, and revives the compensation duty FIFA's own advisers identified after Qatar 2022 and never acted on. Treats the pattern as unresolved FIFA liability, not a closed file.