I'm not totally convinced this is "wrong" as such. If the advantage had been played and Kane's shot had gone wide, would any of us have brought it back for the FK? I think conventional wisdom says no - the advantage occurred, it just happened to not end in a goal.Indeed, and I've never argued against that last sentence.
Dale Johnson has clarified that the PL have told him it was the incorrect restart and Dermot Gallagher said on Sky this morning that play should have restarted with a free-kick to Tottenham.
What I don't really understand is how they missed this part. Michael Oliver has all the angles/replays he needs so surely he should be helping out there. Gallagher suggested on Sky 'the VAR can only tell the referee to disallow the goal and the rest is up to the referee' but that's a ridiculous protocol. If this was a Champions League game the referee would have looked at the pitchside monitor (like with Anthony Taylor in the PSG V Real Madrid game), seen the sequence of events, and presumably restarted with a free-kick to the attacking team as the advantage didn't accrue. The point of not using the pitchside monitors was meant to be to make the decision making process more efficient, not to force a referee into making incorrect decisions because he's only allowed to receive 50% of the informaiotn.
Well....isn't that last sentence kind of what happened? Advantage was played, it didn't result in a goal, so the advantage is done.
I admit it's a little tenuous and it's obvious that giving the attacking FK would have been a better approach. I just think I'd describe the defensive free kick as a "worse" or even "less good" implementation of the advantage law, rather than a "wrong" implementation.