TOT v LIV

[one]

The VAR simply followed protocal

If he did we simply wouldn't be here.

 

[GraemeS]

The referee decided that Diaz was offside and didn't award the goal. This is correct application of Law 10. The referee's error is factual rather than legal. The VAR knew that Diaz was onside but it is not his role to award the goal in accordance with Law 10; it's his role to inform the referee that a clear and obvious error has occurred (hence my earlier post regarding procedural error). Ultimately, it's the referee's decision whether or not to award a goal. Nobody has "breached" law 10.

The referee isn't the only match official. If the VAR knows a goal has legally been scored and not counted, that's still a match official that knows law 10 hasn't been followed and did nothing about it. And it doesn't change that the ref should have been given the information and given the opportunity to decide which law break is least bad.

 

[Tealeaf]

I’m beginning to think there was something in those “you’ll never hear the end of it” memes going around.

We’re up to 18 pages now with nothing new or meaningful being added to the debate. Instead we’re getting more and more polarised and finding novel and extraneous interpretations of law to justify wildly varying opinions.

I think all that needs to be said, has been.

Time to call it a day.