"A Betis player attempts to strike the ball and falls, with the referee initially awarding a penalty and then ruling a previous offside. VAR, after reviewing the play, recommends a review, as the offside called does not exist, and interprets the referee's decision to award the penalty as a clear, obvious, and manifest error."
"The referee, after reviewing the footage in the OFR (Video Assistant Referee), decided to uphold his initial decision. According to the CTA (Technical Committee of Referees), the attacker began his fall after striking the ground with his own foot , and this action caused the Betis player to lose his balance, with no foul by the defender or any other sanctionable action observed."
"Therefore, VAR was correct in recommending the review and the referee should have corrected his initial decision, restarting with a dropped ball after having stopped the game. Fortunately for all involved, the decision did not affect the result of the game, as Barcelona went on to score again through Joao Cancelo to wrap up the win."
Barcelona beat Real Betis 3-1, but a penalty was awarded after Isco went down in the area with Gavi nearby. The Technical Committee of Referees reviewed the incident and concluded the penalty should not have been given. The explanation states that a Betis player appeared to strike the ball and fall, with the referee initially awarding a penalty and then calling an offside that did not exist. VAR recommended a review because the referee’s penalty call was a clear, obvious, and manifest error. After checking footage through the Video Assistant Referee, the referee upheld the original decision. The committee said the attacker began the fall after striking the ground with his own foot, causing loss of balance without any foul by the defender. It said the referee should have corrected the decision and restarted with a dropped ball. The outcome was unaffected because Barcelona scored again through Joao Cancelo.
Read at Barca Blaugranes
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]