Crystal Palace midfielder Eberechi Eze saw his thunderous free-kick against Chelsea controversially chalked off following a VAR intervention at Stamford Bridge.
The 27-year-old had beaten Robert Sanchez with a powerful strike in the 13th minute, seemingly giving the Eagles an early advantage.
However, the celebration was short-lived as video officials identified an infringement by Palace defender Marc Guehi.
**ARE YOU READING THIS ON OUR APP? DOWNLOAD NOW FOR THE BEST GB NEWS EXPERIENCE**
VAR intervened to disallow a thunderous free kick from Eberechi Eze, who is expected to depart the club | GETTYThe centre-back was found to have positioned himself too close to Chelsea's defensive wall when Eze struck the ball, breaching a specific regulation that many supporters were unaware existed.
The regulation in question falls under Law 13 of the FA's official rules, which governs free-kick procedures.
JUST IN: Crystal Palace make announcement on wanted duo as fans draw comparisons to Alexander Isak
According to this law, when defending players create a wall consisting of three or more individuals, all attacking team members must maintain a minimum distance of one metre from that wall until play resumes.
This particular rule aims to prevent attacking players from disrupting defensive formations during set pieces.
The regulation specifies that the one-metre distance must be maintained "until the ball is in play", meaning attacking players cannot encroach on the defensive wall even as their teammate prepares to take the free-kick.
Both the Premier League and PGMOL moved swiftly to clarify the controversial decision through official channels.
The Premier League's Match Centre account on X provided a detailed explanation of the VAR ruling.
"After VAR review, the referee overturned the original decision of goal to Crystal Palace," the statement confirmed.
**SIGN UP FOR OUR FREE DAILY GB NEWS SPORTS NEWSLETTER HERE**
Eberechi Eze struck a venomous free-kick past Robert Sanchez but it was ruled out
|Reuters
The referee's announcement specified: "After review, away number six is less than one metre away from the wall as the shot is taken. Therefore, it's an indirect free kick and a disallowed goal."
PGMOL supported this explanation with their own statement, emphasising that Guehi's proximity to Chelsea's defensive wall constituted the infringement that necessitated the goal's cancellation.
The incident occurred when Guehi positioned himself adjacent to Chelsea's defensive wall, with Palace's captain also making contact with Moises Caicedo during the set piece.
LATEST SPORTS NEWS:
Referee Darren England announced his decision to the stadium | GETTYWhilst the physical contact between the two players initially appeared to be the focus of the VAR review, officials ultimately determined that Guehi's positioning constituted the actual infringement.
The referee's on-field announcement clarified that Palace's number six had violated the one-metre rule at the moment Eze struck the ball.
This resulted in Chelsea being awarded an indirect free-kick instead of conceding a goal, leaving Palace players and supporters frustrated by the application of the rarely-enforced regulation.