Arsenal conceded their first defeat of the season in the Premier League by losing to Newcastle (1-0) on a goal from Anthony Gordon analyzed for 3 minutes by the VAR and finally validated. To the great anger of Mikel Arteta.
“It’s an absolute disgrace. » Mikel Arteta was furious after Arsenal’s defeat at Newcastle (1-0) on Saturday evening. The reason ? Anthony Gordon’s controversial goal, about which there was much to say. But after an analysis of almost three minutes, on three different points, the VAR confirmed Stuart Atwell’s decision to validate this goal. Decryption.
The ball out
In the slow motion and still frame below, it looks like the ball was out before Gordon’s cross and goal. The VAR first looked at this moment of the action, but without being certain. “The ball looks out, but we can’t be sure from this angle,” explained the video referee at the time of analysis. In fact, it is not because we see a piece of grass between the line and the ball that the ball has completely crossed the line. (proof with this video). And images subsequently provided proved that the decision was the right one.
photo credit: Panoramic
Blame it on Gabriel
On the center coming from the left, Joelinton is in a duel with Gabriel Magalhaes, who complained of having been pushed. This is the second point observed by the VAR, who made the following analysis: “There are two hands on Gabriel’s back but we can’t be sure it’s a push. » When in doubt, we therefore maintain the initial decision, which was not to sanction the fault.
photo credit: Panoramic
Gordon’s offside
On Joelinton’s delivery, Anthony Gordon is behind goalkeeper David Raya, with only Gabriel between him and the goal. There could therefore be offside, but the whole question is whether the scorer is behind the ball at the time of the throw-in. Here again, the situation is very confusing, since no angle allows you to see the departure of the ball at the time of the delivery, and the position of Gordon at the same time. Here is what the referee in charge of VAR said to the main referee at the time of the analysis: “ There’s no conclusive evidence if Gordan is behind the ball, so we’re sticking with the on-field decision. »
photo credit: Panoramic
Verdict?
This is a real textbook case, which at least has the merit of reminding us of how VAR works: when in doubt, it is the initial decision that takes precedence. In other words, it is necessary to be certain that there was an error, which is not the case here. The video referee wasn’t sure the ball had gone out (and he was right), he wasn’t sure Joelinton’s stroller was a foul, and he felt the footage was inconclusive to signal offside. If the main referee had signaled Joelinton’s foul, or if the assistant referee had indicated offside, the VAR, with the images, would undoubtedly have upheld the decisions taken on the field.
In conclusion, it is very contentious, but there was no malfunction with the VAR like during Tottenham-Liverpool. The fact that the Premier League sometimes reveals the communications between VAR and the main referee is also a very good way of educating viewers on the rather complex functioning of this tool. The big downside? There is undoubtedly a hand from Joelinton on his throw on Gordon and this hand should certainly have been reported by the VAR to the main referee, who would perhaps have disallowed the goal.
