Venezia had managed to find the equalizer (1-1) in the last attack in full injury time. The confirmation by the referee, Ferrieri Caputi, who had deemed the action and marking valid, was canceled by VAR.
The equalizing goal of Sverko in the 98th minute (1-1) he had frozen theInter and San Siro. The Venezia he had managed to snatch a point in the last attack in full injury time, unaware that that very episode would become the slow-motion event of the match. Confirmation by the referee, Maria Sole Ferrieri Caputiwho had deemed the action and marking valid, was canceled by the VAR. According to the designated official, Valerio Marini (assisted by his assistant, Daniele Chiffi), the network could not be validated and had to be cancelled.
The referee validates the equalizer, the VAR cancels it: what he saw and why
What did you see and why? There was a touch from the player of the lagoon, which was decisive for the deviation which occurred on an aerial tackle with Bisseck: he managed to gain time from the Nerazzurri central defender and head a few steps away from Sommer but the arm position considered anomalous by regulation affected the result of the conclusion. The fist on which the ball had landed extinguished all hopes of Di Francesco’s team.
The coach blurted out on TV during interviews contesting that decision made for that “arm touch not obvious and so objective” and accompanied by refereeing which – according to him – was overall in his favour “always on the other side” throughout the race. The former match director, Marelli, spoke to Dazn live to explain what happened and how that painful decision for Venezia was reached, also drawing attention to the possibility that the author of the disallowed goal (Sverko) himself perhaps he leaned on the Inter defender by gaining leverage at the moment of the jump.
Di Francesco controversial after the goal disallowed against Venezia: “I don’t think it’s as objective as you say”
Why the referee didn’t go to the on-field review: “Objective evaluation”
“Sverko doesn’t notice anything – says Marelli -. In my opinion it would have also been appropriate to talk about Sverko’s jump on Bisseck, but there is the handball that removes any doubt. It is not possible to score a goal immediately a handball, goal correctly annulled with overrule (in the sense that the decision taken directly by VAR prevailed) and not with on-field review because it is an objective evaluation”. The former referee closes the speech by referring to an incontrovertible still image, i.e. the privileged view offered by the cameras placed behind Sommer’s goal: “You can clearly see that the ball changes trajectory when it touches your hand.”
The other slow-motion episodes: why Mkhitaryan’s goal was not validated
Venezia raises its voice for the missed goal in full recovery but there was no shortage of protests on the Inter front too. The Nerazzurri had asked for a penalty kick by Haps in the area but the referee had already whistled for the push given by Dumfries to the Venezia defender, who was unbalanced by that incorrectness.
Inter also had a goal disallowed in the second half: a great goal by Mkhitaryan but the VAR’s check dampens the home team’s enthusiasm. The marking cannot be validated because Dimarcoauthor of the assist, was in an irregular position (one knee) when he received the ball from Bastoni and then made the cross.
Before the equalizer, Sverko had also been the protagonist of another episode: Stankovic saved Thuram’s header, the ball reached Taremi who shot high but in the action there was a touch from Sverko himself. The intervention of the VAR was decisive in reporting the French attacker’s offside.
