Jarred Gillett

The independent Key Match Incidents panel has reviewed 63 of those matches and confirmed 12 errors in them. Everything below is a count: RefCard publishes errors, not an accuracy percentage, because no source publishes the denominator such a figure would need.

Season by season

Confirmed errors are only available from 2023-24, when the Key Match Incidents panel began. Earlier seasons show the disciplinary record only. ‡ Penalties are recorded from 2023-24 onward; a dash means the figure was never collected for that season, not that none were given.

Cards and fouls

The career average is 3.74 yellow cards a game, against a league median of 3.67 for rated referees, on 20.1 fouls a game.

Added time

7.2 minutes of second-half added time on average, against a league median of 7.2. A model of each match's substitutions, cards and goals expects 6.9 from these fixtures — more than those stoppages predict.

Added time is captured from 2024-25 onward, over the 29 matches where we hold it — a shorter window than the figures above.

Club by club

Every club refereed at least three times, with that club's own record in those matches and the cards it took.

The W–D–L is the club's. Nothing here is evidence of bias — a difference this size is what chance looks like. See how that was measured.

Panel review

2026-27

9 of Jarred Gillett’s decisions were reviewed by the panel this season — 6 upheld, 3 ruled incorrect.

At VAR, the 7 of those 9 the VAR had a say in (the panel recorded no VAR verdict on the other 2, so they carry none here): 6 correct, 1 incorrect. The VAR overturned 1 of them. The VAR layer is a separate official’s work and is never attributed to the referee.

1 further decision in these matches was led by an assistant referee. The League names the role and not the official, so it is counted for the match and not against a referee.

• Manchester City v Bournemouth · 27:20 — Penalty not awarded. Challenge by Smith (BOU) on Semenyo (MCI)
  The panel upheld (5-0). “The Referee's call of no penalty was supported, with there being minimal contact made by Smith which was below the threshold for a foul.”
• Manchester City v Bournemouth · 45:00+00:55 — Penalty not awarded. Challenge by Scott (BOU) on Lewis (MCI)
  The panel upheld (5-0). “The Referee's call of no penalty was supported, with there being minimal contact made by Scott on Lewis; and therefore below the threshold for a penalty.”
• Aston Villa v Arsenal · 35:13 — Second caution dismissal not given. Challenge by Tzolis (ARS) on McGinn (AVL)
  The panel upheld (5-0). “The non-award of a second caution was unanimously supported with a good advantage played and therefore the challenge did not stop the promising attack. The panel also felt that the first caution was below the threshold.”
• Aston Villa v Arsenal · 40:14 — Penalty not awarded. Challenge by Torres (AVL) on Calafiori (ARS)
  The panel upheld (5-0). “The panel supported the referee's call of no penalty with the contact made being below the threshold for a penalty.”
• Aston Villa v Arsenal · 53:43 — Penalty awarded. Challenge by Maatsen (AVL) on Saka (ARS)
  The panel ruled incorrect (0-5). “The VAR intervention to award a free kick instead of a penalty was unanimously supported with the foul occurring just outside the area.”
• Aston Villa v Arsenal · 66:48 — Penalty not awarded. Challenge by Kamara (AVL) on Havertz (ARS)
  The panel upheld (5-0). “The panel supported the referee's call of no penalty with the contact made being below the threshold for a penalty.”
• Aston Villa v Arsenal · 67:54 — Penalty not awarded. Challenge by White (ARS) on Maatsen (AVL)
  The panel upheld (5-0). “The panel supported the referee's call of no penalty with the contact made being below the threshold for a penalty.”
• Aston Villa v Arsenal · 90:00+07:27 — Penalty not awarded. Challenge by Maatsen (AVL) on Guimaraes (ARS)
  The panel ruled incorrect (0-5). “The panel felt that a penalty should have been awarded on-field for Maatsen's reckless challenge on Guimaraes. Clear contact was made on the attacker's standing leg and Maatsen made no contact with the ball. They also felt that VAR should have intervened as the non-penalty award was a clear and obvious error.”
• Aston Villa v Arsenal · 90:00+07:28 — Second caution dismissal not given. Challenge by Maatsen (AVL) on Guimaraes (ARS)
  The panel ruled incorrect (0-5). “The panel felt that the challenge was reckless and therefore a second caution should have been awarded.”

Panel-confirmed errors

• 2026-27 · Aston Villa v Arsenal · 54' — corrected; The VAR intervention to award a free kick instead of a penalty was unanimously supported with the foul occurring just outside the area.
• 2026-27 · Aston Villa v Arsenal · 91' — VAR missed an on-field error; The panel felt that a penalty should have been awarded on-field for Maatsen's reckless challenge on Guimaraes. Clear contact was made on the attacker's standing leg and Maatsen made no contact with the ball. They also felt that VAR should have intervened as the non-penalty award was a clear and obvious error.
• 2026-27 · Aston Villa v Arsenal · 91' — second-yellow error; The panel felt that the challenge was reckless and therefore a second caution should have been awarded.
• 2025-26 · Arsenal v Leeds — on-field error below the clear-and-obvious threshold
• 2025-26 · West Ham v Tottenham — on-field error below the clear-and-obvious threshold
• 2025-26 · Crystal Palace v Bournemouth · 52' — referee rejected a correct VAR recommendation; The majority felt that Sarr was very likely to gain possession with the ability to create an obvious goalscoring opportunity.
• 2025-26 · Wolves v Chelsea — on-field error below the clear-and-obvious threshold
• 2025-26 · Bournemouth v Sunderland · 3' — VAR missed an on-field error
• 2025-26 · Newcastle v West Ham — on-field error below the clear-and-obvious threshold
• 2024-25 · Tottenham v Manchester City · 90' — on-field error below the clear-and-obvious threshold
• 2024-25 · Brentford v Aston Villa · 90' — on-field error below the clear-and-obvious threshold