Not sure why it’s a VAR thing shouldn’t the ref be deciding?
I don't understand why it went through for so long on the one who actually put it in. The ball was played to him and he mistimed his run, it pulls the defender so he's interfering with or without the flick of his foot. And yeah the referee should be saying that to them.
The decision on field was offside so, because VAR agreed with the on field decision, it doesn't require the referee to go over to the screen.
CharcyI don't understand why it went through for so long on the one who actually put it in. The ball was played to him and he mistimed his run, it pulls the defender so he's interfering with or without the flick of his foot. And yeah the referee should be saying that to them.
I disagree that he's interfered or impacted that goal having re-looked at the laws - I think it's a poor decision.
I agree with you on why they don't just look at that part first if they're going to disallow it - it took them a number of minutes focusing on something that didn't actually impact their decision.
Didn’t mean that he had to go to the screen I was referencing that they could have gone straight to the other player interfering and not spend three minutes seeing if the one who scored was offside.
Wouldn't be a weekend without abit of var controversy.
It's not fit for purpose. A referee sent a player off last week after watching it on the screen. It was later overturned.
[www.espn.co.uk]
Scrap it tonight!!