Eze's free-kick was ruled out
For a moment, it felt as though Crystal Palace had stunned Stamford Bridge during their first Premier League game of the 2025/26 season against Chelsea, on Sunday, August 17, 2025.
Eberechi Eze, elegant as ever over a dead ball, smashed a free-kick beyond Robert Sánchez in the 13th minute, sparking wild celebrations among the travelling Palace fans.
It seemed the perfect script: their talisman, perhaps in his final outing for the club, striking the blow that would humble Chelsea.
But as the cheers still rang, referee Darren England pointed for an indirect free kick in Chelsea’s favour.
VAR confirmed the call, and Eze’s strike was chalked off. Confusion rippled through the stands. What had just happened?
The law behind the decision
The answer lies in a little-known amendment to football’s laws introduced by IFAB in 2019. The rule states:
“When a free kick is being taken, if an attacking player is less than 1 metre from a wall consisting of three or more defending players, an indirect free kick is awarded to the defending team.”
The purpose of this law is to prevent attackers from deliberately infiltrating the wall to block defenders’ view or create disruption. It was designed to restore fairness and stop chaotic jostling every time a free-kick was taken near goal.
The key detail in Eze’s goal
On closer inspection, Palace defender Marc Guehi was standing less than one metre away from Chelsea’s three-man wall as Eze struck the ball. Though Guehi didn’t touch it, his positioning was enough to trigger the law.
As soon as the ball crossed the line, VAR reviewed the situation. The footage was clear: Guehi’s proximity to the wall breached the one-metre rule. The referee had no choice but to disallow the goal.
For Palace supporters, it felt cruel that their team’s moment of brilliance fell victim to one of the game’s most obscure clauses.
Eze, too, had reason to feel aggrieved. The 27-year-old has long been Palace’s heartbeat, and this could well have been his farewell moment in red and blue. Instead, the lawbook intervened.
The disallowed strike set the tone for the afternoon. Chelsea, still sluggish after a draining summer, failed to turn dominance into goals. Palace, organised and disciplined under Oliver Glasner, made life difficult but ultimately had to settle for a goalless draw.
Yet when the game is remembered, it will be for that one incident: Eze’s free-kick that wasn’t, a goal erased not by VAR controversy, but by the precise wording of the rulebook.
Conclusion
The referee’s decision was unquestionably correct, according to the laws of the game. Guehi’s position inside the one-metre zone rendered Eze’s strike void, no matter how spectacular it looked.
Watch the video below:
Crystal Palace and Eze have been robbed there.
— Liam Thompson (@TomaNUFC16) August 17, 2025
Another season of corruption for teams outside the top 6 and another season of unbalanced VAR ahead 🙄#CHECRY pic.twitter.com/dUz4fosTqF
Copyright © 1994 - 2025 GhanaWeb. All rights reserved.
