English journalist Dale Johnson has written that VAR should have permitted referee Michael Oliver to review the replay to assess whether Enzo Fernández impeded Lisandro Martínez.

British media noted that what made this incident confusing was that Erling Haaland's goal was initially disallowed for the wrong reason. He was ruled offside when he was not in an offside position. However, it later emerged that the goal should have been disallowed because Enzo Fernández was in an offside position.

The offside rules contain an important clause that applies to Enzo Fernández's situation. A player is in an offside position if:

"They deliberately attempt to play a ball close to them, and this action impacts an opponent"

Both parts of this clause must be satisfied. A player in an offside position can attempt to reach the ball without committing a foul, but there must be an impact on an opponent.

When the ball arrived, Enzo Fernández rushed toward it and attempted a header, with Lisandro Martínez directly behind him.

VAR official Matt Donohue should have asked himself whether Enzo Fernández's actions impacted Lisandro Martínez.

In other words, had Enzo Fernández not jumped to contest the header, would Lisandro Martínez have made a different decision in dealing with the ball?

If neither Enzo Fernández nor Lisandro Martínez could have reached the ball, the goal should have stood.

Furthermore, if Enzo Fernández had not attempted to play the ball, there would have been no offside.

But he did. And since the ball passed Lisandro Martínez by barely a yard, it is difficult to argue that Enzo Fernández was not in an offside position.

There is also a view that Enzo Fernández's actions affected goalkeeper Ederson's positioning.

However, the goal was initially disallowed because Erling Haaland was ruled offside, which was incorrect. Therefore, this decision needed to be overturned.

Subsequently, VAR should have allowed referee Michael Oliver to review the replay to assess whether Enzo Fernández impeded an opponent.

This would have created an unusual situation where the disallowed goal remained disallowed after review, but that is what should have happened.

Enzo Fernández was clearly in an offside position, which would be an error by VAR if not addressed.

Was VAR too focused on potential contact by Enzo Fernández?

If so, did VAR overlook that Enzo Fernández was in an offside position and fail to consider the impact on an opponent? This appears to be the most plausible explanation.

AI翻訳。

AFのPCサイトが新登場！パソコンでニュース、コメント、試合詳細、詳細データをご覧いただけます。アクセス：www.allfootballapp.com