United States forward Ricardo Pepi continued his excellent run of form with a goal that helped PSV Eindhoven beat Utrecht 2-1 on Sunday.

Pepi scored the equaliser for his side to bring his scoring run to four consecutive Eredivisie matches — and furthered his case to start for the USMNT at the World Cup next summer.

PSV found themselves behind in the first half, with hosts Utrecht taking the lead through Mike van der Hoorn. The centre-back got on the end of a pinpoint cross from Siebe Horemans to nod home. While the linesman’s flag was initially raised, a VAR review found van der Hoorn to be onside.

The visitors came out fighting in the second half, and it was the U.S. duo of Sergiño Dest and Pepi who linked up cleverly for the equaliser. Dest got the ball in space on the right of the penalty area, and rolled it with pace — beating two defenders — into the six-yard box to Pepi, who finished first time in the bottom left corner.

Ivan Perišić delivered the winner for PSV 15 minutes before time, finishing off a perfectly executed corner routine. Joey Veerman whipped the ball to the near post, where the Croatian winger had timed his run, allowing him to head past the keeper on his side.

Pepi and Eindhoven’s win extended their lead at the top of the table to 12 points by full time. It was their 15th league win of the season, having only dropped points in two matches.

Video assistant referee causes controversy every week in the Premier League, but how are decisions made and are they correct?

This season, we take a look at the major incidents to examine and explain the process both in terms of VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game.

Andy Davies (@andydaviesref) is a former Select Group referee, with over 12 seasons on the elite list, working across the Premier League and Championship. With extensive experience at the elite level, he has operated within the VAR space in the Premier League and offers a unique insight into the processes, rationale and protocols that are delivered on a Premier League matchday.

Tottenham Hotspur 1-2 Liverpool

Referee: John Brooks
VAR: Stuart Attwell
Incident: Possible red card
Time: 30th minute

What happened: Tottenham’s Xavi Simons was late with a challenge on Virgil van Dijk. Referee John Brooks’ original decision was a yellow card for a reckless challenge.

VAR decision: After VAR review, the referee overturned the original decision of yellow card to Simons and issued a red card for serious foul play.

VAR review: A relatively straightforward process for VAR Stuart Attwell to recommend an on-field review to the referee, once the replays had been reviewed.

The characteristics of a reckless challenge, originally identified by the on-field referee, were not evident in the footage presented to the VAR team when reviewing the incident. Attwell would have been very uncomfortable with Simons’ action, feeling the force and speed of the contact on the back of Van Dijk’s calf endangered the safety of the center back and met the threshold for a possible red card.

Having viewed the challenge from three different angles, at various speeds and paused at point of contact, Attwell had no doubt that an on-field review was required.

Verdict: A correct and positive intervention by VAR in this situation, with Brooks also correct in overturning his original decision of a yellow card once reviewed.

Some will comment that Simons was unfortunate, with no intent and highlighting that these types of challenges can look worse in slow motion. I don’t disagree, but the nature of the contact in this challenge, on the back of the calf and with a level of force and speed, make this a dangerous one regardless.

These types of challenges are difficult to recognize as red card offenses in real time. Processing the point of contact, force and speed when two players are running in the same direction presents a challenge for the referee, and the original decision by Brooks of a yellow card was an understandable one.

Newcastle United 2-2 Chelsea

Referee: Andrew Madley
VAR: Peter Bankes
Incident: Penalty appeal for Newcastle United
Time: 55th minute

What happened: As the ball was played into the Chelsea penalty area, Chelsea defender Trevoh Chalobah challenged Anthony Gordon, seemingly making no contact with the ball and catching the left leg of Gordon. Referee Andrew Madley deemed it a fair challenge in real time.

VAR decision: The referee’s call of no penalty to Newcastle was checked and confirmed by VAR, with the contact from Chalobah on Gordon deemed to be side-to-side in a shielding action and the ball within playing distance.

VAR review: As with all subjective calls, the starting point for the VAR is the on-field decision and the live communication.

Madley would have seen the contact from Chalobah as normal contact, describing the ball as running out of play. In his opinion, Gordon placed his body in a position to draw and create contact from Chalobah; therefore, Gordon was trying to win a penalty as opposed to it being a foul by the Chelsea defender.

Bankes, having viewed the footage, backed the on-field decision of no penalty, and cleared the decision as correct.

Verdict: This was a foul challenge by Chalobah, and an on-field review and a penalty kick should have been the outcome.

I have some sympathy with Madley on-field, as he would have had some doubt that the level of contact, with the ball running out of play, met the threshold of a foul from his on-field position.

However, the review process by VAR would have highlighted that, despite the direction and destination of the loose ball, Chalobah made a clear, careless foul challenge on Gordon, making no contact on the ball.

It’s difficult to understand why Bankes did not recommend an on-field review to the referee in this event.

Referees are always reluctant to award fouls against defenders in these types of situations — certainly when a defender is adjudged to be guiding the ball out of play and the ball is in playing distance. However, this situation was different. All the evidence from the replays clearly indicate that this was a careless foul challenge by Chalobah, regardless of where the ball was, and an understanding that the defender was not in control of the ball at any point. A clear error had been made on-field and an OFR should have been the outcome.

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — A few days before the NCAA women’s volleyball national championship, Texas A&M opposite hitter Logan Lednicky posted an old family video on her Instagram account. Lednicky is maybe 5 or 6 years old in the video, wearing a maroon A&M shirt and doing cartwheels on the grass at Kyle Field, A&M’s football stadium. “Say ‘Gig ‘Em, Aggies,'” her mom, Leigh Lednicky, implores her, and little Logan walks up to the camera, smiles and gives a thumbs-up.

Under the video, Lednicky wrote that she is living in that little Aggie’s “answered prayers.”

Her dad, Kyle, was a long snapper for the Texas A&M football team in the 1990s, and her mom worked in the football office. She chose Texas A&M because she always dreamed of being a fourth-generation Aggie, but that was only part of it. She wanted to help build a middling volleyball program into a powerhouse.

Lednicky went beyond that little girl’s dreams Sunday, swatting 11 kills to lead Texas A&M to a sweep over No. 1 seed Kentucky for the program’s first national title. The senior from Sugar Land, Texas, was a linchpin in the Aggies’ improbable December postseason run, helping her team knock off three No. 1 seeds in the NCAA tournament.

In the final four matches of her career, when it mattered most, Lednicky amassed 69 total kills, a team high. She’s one of four seniors who have been with the program from the beginning — they went 13-16 as freshmen — and set the tone for the historic season. The past and present swirled through that class Sunday. With the Aggies cruising in the final set, coach Jamie Morrison high-fived Lednicky, and hung on to her hand.

“I think she had that moment where, ‘This might be the last four points of my college career,'” Morrison said. “I think she actually started getting a little teary on the court. I was like, ‘Oh, no, did I just ruin everything?’ No, it means the world.

“There was a group of them here from the beginning that said, ‘I want to be a part of this, I want to build this program.’ … I don’t think they were envisioning a national championship by the time they were done. I think when we were selling what we were doing, it was building something they could come back to in the future and be really, really proud they helped build.”

It was Lednicky who helped save the season on Dec. 13 in the Sweet 16, when the Aggies were down two sets to Louisville. She hammered a team-high 20 kills in a reverse sweep, and afterward, Lednicky mentioned a random note that someone left on the scorer’s table as her team was teetering toward elimination.

The note said, “Something great is about to happen.”

She has always been the charismatic optimist — the one who keeps things loose. Teammates call her everything from their “ride-or-die” to a best friend.

She has been a recruiter. When Morgan Perkins hit the transfer portal after her freshman season at Oklahoma three years ago, her first text came from Lednicky, an old club teammate. Perkins said the text was something along the lines of, “Hey, Mo-Mo, I see you’re in the portal …”

Lednicky, along with sophomore Kyndal Stowers, helped pull A&M together when the Wildcats sprinted out to a 15-9 lead in the first set. The Aggies later said they dealt with some jitters at the start of the match, but it was short-lived. Lednicky’s kill drew A&M within one, and then she teamed up with Perkins for a block that tied the game. Stowers’ kill completed the rally and gave the Aggies the set, 26-24.

From there, the Aggies dominated. They took a commanding 19-8 lead in the second and pulled away in the third with a Lednicky kill that made it 18-11.

“I was pretty emotional all day today,” Lednicky said, “just knowing that no matter the outcome of this game, it would be my last getting to represent A&M on my chest. Being able to do this with these girls — end like this, I just can’t even believe it.

“I’m so happy I get to carry this with me through the rest of my life and remember all the memories with these girls.”

In the waning moments of the match, a corner of the arena chanted, “Why not us?” It became a slogan for the Aggies in the postseason, during the match against Louisville. Late Sunday, Lednicky gave a shoutout to her boyfriend and teammate Ava Underwood’s boyfriend for coining it for the Aggies at a concession stand in Lincoln, Nebraska.

“We kind of took it and ran with it,” she said. “We started saying it. Ava and Addi (Applegate) wrote it on their shoe. Now it’s on a T-shirt somehow. Shout out to them.

“But, I mean, it’s true. It’s a testament to the hard work this program has put in all year long, staff, players. That’s such a great statement. ‘Why not us’ has turned into, ‘It is us’. I think with that dawg mentality all season long, all tournament long, we knew it was going to be us.”

Morrison, who came to A&M in December 2022 and overhauled the program’s culture, figured it would take at least five years to win it all. He credited the rapid ascent to his team’s work ethic.

Kyle Lednicky waited for his daughter after the match, marveling over how she and her teammates set out to change a program and did it so quickly, and dramatically. He said former A&M football coach R.C. Slocum texted her Sunday morning and wished her luck.

“That was pretty cool,” Kyle Lednicky said.

Of course he always hoped his daughter would go to his alma mater, but he says he never put pressure on her. Maybe it was osmosis, that all those football games, and that maroon clothing, would eventually seep into her consciousness, and her heart. It didn’t matter. That fourth-generation Aggie is now a first-generation champion.

Kyle Lednicky saw his daughter’s Instagram post Thursday, and it brought back a flood of memories.

“I had to put it away,” he said, “because I got teary-eyed when I was looking at it.”