Celtic Vs Bayern

[NoFoulsAllowed]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1889975016454004986

Seen this. What we thinking

 

[RustyRef]

It is surprising, given that UEFA normally ask referees to come down hard on challenges that land on top of the foot. It that was in the EPL or SPL I don't think there'd be any question of it being a foul, but UEFA do have that much lower bar.

 

[JamesL]

How has this got to VAR review. It's offside isn't it?

 

[Runner Ref]

How has this got to VAR review. It's offside isn't it?

Aye, AR signals for offside. So very odd.

Although, referee apparently deeming defender plays ball before catching attacker and deciding it’s not a foul. Fancy that.

 

[es1]

If it's an offside position not sure how it can be argued it's anything other than an offside offence...if that makes sense

 

[RustyRef]

If it's an offside position not sure how it can be argued it's anything other than an offside offence...if that makes sense

I can only assume there's a deeper defender not seen on the video that plays the attacker onside.

 

[NoFoulsAllowed]

The VAR team posted an update to the screen once their decision was made.

 

[one]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1889975016454004986

Seen this. What we thinking

The video is geoblocked but I have seen other replays.

It's six one way, half dozen the other. Did the defender stamp the attacker's foot, or did the attacker put his foot under the defender's? I can't tell which way from the replays i have seen.

 

[Archer]

“‘On field decision confirmed no penalty no foul bayern munchen’s number two played the ball in a fair manner before the contact between the players,’ you’ll never sing that”

 

[one]

The VAR team posted an update to the screen once their decision was made.

This is a really poor way to explain the decision. It basically means if a player plays the ball in a fair manner, any contact after that can not be penalised which we all know is not true.

Simply, "The defender was not careless in his challenge for the ball" should have sufficed.

 

[deusex]

It's six one way, half dozen the other. Did the defender stamp the attacker's foot, or did the attacker put his foot under the defender's? I can't tell which way from the replays i have seen.

Holy moly opinions are something else.
The sooner computers take over refereeing the better cos that is the most nail on foul I've ever seen (ignoring the offside aspect).

 

[Runner Ref]

“‘On field decision confirmed no penalty no foul bayern munchen’s number two played the ball in a fair manner before the contact between the players,’ you’ll never sing that”

I’ll sure as hell be singing it

 

[RefereeX]

Given the UEFA directive about challenges where a players studs land on top of another players foot, assuming the player was onside, I'm surprised this wasn't given. Whether I think it should have been or not, is another matter - I can see both arguments.

 

[JamesL]

I'm totally lost with this... I've just looked at the highlights which shows the whole back line and he looks for all the world to be offside.
Id love to know if this was checked because a) no VAR intervention would have been needed as Celtic player clearly interferes with the opponent and b) the dropped ball restart would also be wrong as the restart should have always been idfk.

 

[bloovee]

This is a really poor way to explain the decision. It basically means if a player plays the ball in a fair manner, any contact after that can not be penalised which we all know is not true.

Simply, "The defender was not careless in his challenge for the ball" should have sufficed.

It doesn't mean that.

Well done to the ref for sticking to the onfield decision.

 

[JamesL]

Well done to the ref for sticking to the onfield decision.

He didn't. The on field decision was offside

 

[LothianRef]

I’ve still no idea what the original onfield decision was. I had half an eye on this game in the pub on Wednesday night so only saw it when the VAR was reviewing the incident. After the OFR the referee seemed to signal for a dropped ball (as if he’d given the penalty and then over turned his decision) but apparently no penalty was given at any point?

 

[JamesL]

I’ve still no idea what the original onfield decision was. I had half an eye on this game in the pub on Wednesday night so only saw it when the VAR was reviewing the incident. After the OFR the referee seemed to signal for a dropped ball (as if he’d given the penalty and then over turned his decision) but apparently no penalty was given at any point?

No. From the limited highlights. Challenge goes in. Flag goes up and referee stops play indicating indirect free kick. So onfield decision has to be offside.
The only way we get to dropped ball is if there was non-offside offence.
And this can only be if the pictures proved that the player was not in an offside position.
Possible scenarios:

A) player not offside = Dropped ball
B) VAR focussed on PK offside not checked in error.
C) Ref flustered by VAR check and over rule is wrong in law on restart

 

[one]

No. From the limited highlights. Challenge goes in. Flag goes up and referee stops play indicating indirect free kick. So onfield decision has to be offside.
The only way we get to dropped ball is if there was non-offside offence.
And this can only be if the pictures proved that the player was not in an offside position.
Possible scenarios:

A) player not offside = Dropped ball
B) VAR focussed on PK offside not checked in error.
C) Ref flustered by VAR check and over rule is wrong in law on restart

D) referee (and VAR) think AR had flagged for a foul.

Am I reading C wrongly? How can the referee over rule be wrong in law?

 

[JamesL]

D) referee (and VAR) think AR had flagged for a foul.

Am I reading C wrongly? How can the referee over rule be wrong in law?

Over ruling a correct offside and restarting w/dropped ball, is what I meant