Mbappe's missed penalty for Real Madrid vs Real Betis not retaken due to IFAB rule clarification
Quick Look
Kylian Mbappe's missed penalty in Real Madrid's La Liga loss to Real Betis was not retaken despite claims of encroachment by Marc Bartra, as Spanish refereeing confirmed authorities the decision aligned with the 2026-2027 IFAB Laws of the Game, which exclude airborne body parts from encroachment determination if any part remains on the ground.
AI-generated summary
Why It Matters
Real Madrid suffered their first loss of the 2026-2027 La Liga season against Real Betis, with Kylian Mbappe missing a penalty kick that could have changed the match outcome.
Kylian Mbappe's missed penalty in Real Madrid's loss to Real Betis in round 4 of La Liga cannot be replayed because the rules are often misleading.
In the fifth minute of injury, the second half of the Betis - Real match in the fourth round of La Liga on September 4, Vinicius was fouled by midfielder Natan in the penalty area, helping Real receive a penalty. Mbappe took responsibility but the shot went to the left corner and was blocked by goalkeeper Alvaro Valles. The French striker then did not have time to kick the rebound because Marc Bartra promptly cleared it.
Immediately after the ball, slow motion images showed that Bartra seemed to have entered the penalty area before Mbappe shot. This caused an argument that the Betis player was guilty of illegally entering the designated position before the penalty was taken - and Real had to have a replay.
However, referee Alejandro Hernandez and the VAR team led by Iglesias Villanueva decided not to re-do it. According to the Spanish Arbitration Technical Committee (CTA), this decision is in accordance with the law applicable from the 2026-2027 season.
According to Rule 14 of IFAB, at the moment the penalty taker touches the ball, the position of the defending player is determined based on the feet or any part of the body in contact with the ground. If one or both feet are inside the penalty area, on the penalty area boundary line or in the circular area outside the penalty area, the player is considered to be trespassing.
But there is an exception to the rule, which is that the part of the body that is in the air does not count towards the player's position. In other words, the fact that part of a player's body is above the penalty area does not mean that the player has entered it.
This is especially important in the Bartra case.
When Mbappe kicks, Bartra has one foot still in contact with the ground. Therefore, his position is determined by the position of his feet touching the ground, instead of the part of his body protruding above the penalty area.
The IFAB Rules for the 2026-2027 season make this issue even clearer. The concept of a player being "in the air" only applies when the entire body is no longer in contact with the ground.
Therefore, if just looking at the projection of Bartra's body onto the field, viewers can think that he has entered the penalty area. But according to the rules, that "projection" does not count when the player still has part of his body in contact with the field. This is the reason why Real was not allowed to kick the penalty again.
According to the old law, the vertical projection of a body part that is in the air does not count. If according to the old rules, Bartra would have violated the penalty and Real would be given a replay penalty.
Another point of confusion is that a player stepping on the line before a penalty is taken does not always result in a replay. According to the law, intrusion is only handled when the violating player has a direct impact on the situation.
If a defending player enters, a foul is charged when the action clearly affects the penalty taker or when the player is involved in the situation after the kick, for example in a challenge or play after the ball has bounced, thereby preventing a goal, a scoring opportunity or a shot.
For an attacking player, a foul is determined when his position clearly affects the goalkeeper or when he participates in the situation after the ball bounces and scores, finishes or creates a chance.
Therefore, the referee cannot simply rely on a player "rising" forward to automatically call for a retake of the penalty. They must consider both the legal position under the law and the impact of the action on the development of the situation.
This is Real's first defeat under Jose Mourinho in the 2026-2027 season. Before missing the penalty, Real created many opportunities. The away team scored 20 times in the whole match. Vinicius once bounced the ball off the post, while Mbappe had other favorable opportunities, but could not score.
In the 81st minute, striker Troy Parrott scored to give Betis the lead. Real then received a penalty in injury time but Mbappe could not beat Valles.
What to Watch
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
Real Madrid will request clarification from La Liga refereeing committee on the encroachment rule interpretation
Likely · Within days
IFAB will issue additional guidance on the 'airborne body part' rule to prevent similar controversies
Possible · Within weeks
Open Questions
- Will Real Madrid appeal the refereeing decision?
- How will this affect Mbappe's confidence in future penalty situations?
- Will IFAB clarify the airborne body part rule further to prevent future confusion?







