🔄Referee's decision was based on the player playing the ball first.
📏VAR's decision was influenced by the high foot and chest contact.
⚖️Opinions are split on whether it should be a penalty or not.
🚩Debate arises regarding the fairness of the referee's position and VAR's involvement.
📺Slow-motion replay shows that the defender's foot may have touched the ball before the contact.
Was it a penalty or a free kick?
—The referee believed it was not a penalty, while VAR determined it was a penalty due to the high foot and chest contact.
Why didn't VAR intervene?
—VAR can only intervene if there is a clear and obvious error. In this case, the referee's decision was deemed subjective and not an error.
What were the arguments for and against giving a penalty?
—Arguments for a penalty include the high foot and chest contact, while arguments against it include the player playing the ball first.
Did the referee consult with VAR?
—Yes, the referee consulted with VAR, but the decision was ultimately his to make based on what he saw.
What impact did this decision have on the game?
—The decision led to a penalty being awarded, which potentially influenced the final outcome of the game.
00:03Controversial last-minute penalty decision at Anfield.
00:13Referee believes it was not a penalty as the player played the ball first.
00:21VAR determines it's a penalty due to the high foot and chest contact.
00:41Opinions are split on whether it should be a penalty or not.
02:23Debate arises regarding the fairness of the referee's position and VAR's involvement.
