England Escape with Point as Ghana Denied 'Clear Penalty'

England Escape with Point as Ghana Denied 'Clear Penalty' – Pundits United on Konsa Foul

England escaped with a fortunate point after a goalless draw against Ghana at the 2026 World Cup, with the main controversy a late penalty incident. E...

Jun 24, 2026 4 min read 1,196 views

England Escape with Point as Ghana Denied 'Clear Penalty' – Pundits United on Konsa Foul

Editorial illustration

Text Size

Match Marred by Late Penalty Drama

England laboured to a 0-0 stalemate against Ghana in their second FIFA World Cup 2026 Group L fixture in Boston, but the biggest talking point arrived in the closing stages. With ten minutes left on the clock, Prince Adu surged into the England area only to be clattered by Ezri Konsa – yet referee Ivan Barton waved play on and VAR declined to intervene. Replays showed Konsa making contact with Adu’s knee and none with the ball, leaving Ghanaian players and staff incredulous.

The Incident: Konsa’s Lunge Divides Opinion

As Ghana broke forward in a rare venture, Adu carried the ball at pace and entered the right side of the box. Konsa, retreating desperately, launched into a sliding challenge with both feet off the ground. He connected cleanly with Adu’s standing leg while the ball ran away from danger. The on-field decision of no foul stunned Ghana’s bench, but English hearts leaped into mouths as replays painted a damning picture.

Pundits Unanimous: ‘That’s a Penalty’

Across the BBC’s coverage, the verdict was unequivocal. Former Manchester United and England striker Wayne Rooney said bluntly:

“I think that's a penalty. Konsa takes a huge risk. His feet are off the floor when he comes flying in and he gets the man, not the ball. That could easily have been given in my view.”

Fellow ex-England international and former Manchester City defender Micah Richards added:

“On another day, that could have been a penalty. England were chasing the game… but you still need that protection behind you.”

Most damning was the assessment of Darren Cann, the assistant referee for the 2010 World Cup final, who felt VAR should have stepped in:

“Konsa makes absolutely no contact at all with the ball, he brings down his opponent. He is airborne, he is out of control… For me this was a penalty kick.”

Why Wasn’t the VAR Involved?

The apparent inaction from the video assistant referee left many scratching their heads, especially given the high-profile nature of the tournament. However, this World Cup is operating under a revised VAR protocol. FIFA’s head of referees, Pierluigi Collina, has instructed officials to apply a higher threshold for on-field challenges – effectively reducing the frequency of VAR reviews in favour of letting play flow. The logic: if you allow more tackles to go unpunished on the pitch, you must correspondingly dial down VAR interventions to maintain consistency.

In the Premier League, a similar incident would almost certainly have led to a trip to the monitor. Here, the VAR team in Boston reportedly reviewed the footage but decided the on-field decision did not meet the “clear and obvious error” bar – a phrase now interpreted more strictly than many fans are used to.

Key Takeaways

Clear foul missed: Konsa’s challenge met the criteria for a penalty – no contact on the ball, excessive force, airborne lunge.
VAR policy under scrutiny: FIFA’s deliberate scaling back of VAR interventions may deny clear-cut penalties in the name of consistency.
England fortunate: Tuchel’s side were below par and escaped a defeat that would have complicated their path to the knockout stage.
Ghana hard done by: The Black Stars defended heroically and were a penalty away from a famous victory, which would have all but guaranteed their progression.
Precedent for future tournaments? If this is the new normal for VAR at World Cups, expect more controversial non-calls.