Personally I think this one is the worst of the lot. With Onana you could claim the foul didn't materially matter as he wasn't getting the ball. I don't agree with it, but it's an argument. This is the reverse, the 'foul' makes no difference at all to whether the goal goes in. Gordon Banks in his pomp isn't getting to that. 3 professional referees, not in the moment, decided that should be disallowed
But they didnt make a decision, they actually passed it back to the on field referee to decide, so offsides arent black and white they can be subjective. Which every tv commentator has said in the past that its not the case?
The 3 professional referees are the 2 in the VAR room and the one on the field. They wouldn't have referred him unless both thought it was offside. An interfering with play offside is subjective, has been since they changed the law in the early 90s
Id bet a pound to a penny there isn't anything in any VAR guidelines about the materiality of a decision. I.e. Yes, he's commited an offence but it makes fuck all difference to the outcome so it's irrelevant.
I’d forgotten about the ‘soft’ headbutt.
By far the worst of the lot. They’ve made the right decision and then gone out of their way to change it. The others can get covered by “high bar” nonsense.
Yeah that was a far less explainable decision, despite what GON said today.
The offside law was never intended to rule out goals like the Wolves equaliser.
Tongue slightly but definitely not firmly in cheek
He’s offside - why is that awful?
