ENG v MALTA

[Joshref]

Is there VAR in qualifiers? I lose track nowadays. Anyway, penalty shout for Kane in what has been a boring pointless game

 

[SammyT5]

Commentators just confirmed that VAR is used. There’s not any scenario in which that isn’t a penalty - let alone being a dive.

 

[SammyT5]

Having now seen the replay I can now see why it hasn’t been given, but I still don’t think it’s a dive. Still looks like a penalty would be a decent decision but probably not a C&O error for VAR.

 

[Viridis1886]

Commentators just confirmed that VAR is used. There’s not any scenario in which that isn’t a penalty - let alone being a dive.

Not a pen for me, but not a yellow either.

 

[RustyRef]

Kane has made sure his left leg made contact with the keeper. Whether that is just clever forward play or simulation is open to debate, but it isn't a penalty.

 

[Quarryref]

Great call from the referee for me. He's read exactly what Harry Kane has done

 

[Tealeaf]

Same with the Rashford one.

 

[SammyT5]

Same with the Rashford one.

The Rashford one is probably less of a penalty than the Kane one. They’re battling for the ball and ultimately Rashford pulls down the defender.

 

[ladbroke8745]

That's a poor offside call surely.
Hasn't impacted the keepers ability at all.

 

[freddier]

I’m struggling to see how he’s interfered there, not in the keepers sight line.

 

[ladbroke8745]

I’m struggling to see how he’s interfered there, not in the keepers sight line.

The image behind the goal shows exactly how much the keeper was impacted.

 

[SammyT5]

It’s a subjective call surely. Obviously he’s in an offside position but whether he’s interfered at all with play is doubtful.

 

[RustyRef]

I think the fact that Kane has had to move his body to get out of the way of the shot has influenced them. Certainly think it was subjective and therefore should have been an on-pitch review rather than just disallowed.

 

[ladbroke8745]

I think the fact that Kane has had to move his body to get out of the way of the shot has influenced them. Certainly think it was subjective and therefore should have been an on-pitch review rather than just disallowed.

My question is though, did it directly impede the keepers reactions?
Was he already committed to the dive from Rice ****? We all know it's not an offence to be in an offside position unless you interfere with play. Just feel that, as you said, that an on pitch review should've taken place as he has final say. I know it doesn't normally happen, but normally it's a case of draw a line for the person who has scored from being in offside position, not supposed interference.

 

[es1]

Anyone who's ever watched football knows that's a goal. Good old var to the rescue

 

[DazN]

They showed one camera angle where it looked like it might have brushed Kane's hip on the way through, but they didn't show it again so who knows?

 

[santa sangria]

For me it was an obvious action and it must have impacted the GK even if for a nano second.

I think if Kane obviously doesn’t touch it, and if the GK obviously doesn’t touch it, then different scenario and no offside.

But a nano second here is the difference between the GK tipping in or round the post.

In the end the offside law exists to stop players goal hanging. Kane’s mistake here.

 

[Mr Dean]

Rumours that the officials knew Kane touched the ball after hearing him trying to claim the goal for himself.

 

[santa sangria]

Kane’s second mistake here.

 

[RyantheRef]

The attacker initiates contact with the keeper; book him.