Refereeing chief Dino Tommasi insists Milan coach Paulo Fonseca was fallacious to protest so angrily on the Charles De Ketelaere purpose for Atalanta. ‘It’s completely a good purpose.’
There was controversy after Milan’s 2-1 defeat to Atalanta, as , claiming there was a “clear foul” from Charles De Ketelaere on Theo Hernandez when heading within the Marten de Roon free kick.
That was the opening purpose and has prompted an excessive amount of debate, with some pundits agreeing it was a foul and others insisting De Ketelaere merely jumped greater and earlier, so inevitably ended up together with his arms on Hernandez’s again.
Contemplating the quantity of consideration that incident acquired, it was inevitable that would analyse it intimately, taking part in the audio of the Video Assistant Referees discussing it.
They stated there was “completely nothing” as a result of De Ketelaere “jumped a lot earlier” than his marker.
Refereeing Affiliation again Atalanta-Milan interpretation
“It was a wonderful efficiency from La Penna, as a result of De Ketelaere jumps sooner than Theo. There’s a slight lean on his again, however that’s solely after and on account of him leaping first and better.
“The VAR confirms that it’s completely a good purpose and there may be nothing fallacious with it.”
The previous gamers within the DAZN studio, Massimo Ambrosini, Marco Parolo and Ciro Ferrara, all agreed that Theo Hernandez was too passive and weak when leaping for the ball.
after taking his protests too far, suggesting that the referee was “steering” the sport in a single route and that there was a “lack of respect” in direction of Milan all through the season.
It was notably galling as a result of it got here throughout a weekend the place referees are carrying black marks on their faces to focus on the latest incidents of violence in opposition to officers within the newbie leagues.
One other incident that prompted controversy was Pierre Kalulu of Juventus not receiving a crimson card when clipping the heels of Bologna’s Jens Odgaard operating on purpose.
The VAR discussing it confirmed it was a foul, however couldn’t intervene to provide a crimson card as a result of the ball was past Odgaard and Mattia Perin was prepared to collect it.
VAR can solely intervene to provide a crimson card for Denial of Aim-Scoring Alternative, not a yellow.
“There are three out of 4 standards right here for the DOGSO, however not the fourth, he’s not in possession of the ball,” confirmed Tommasi.
“The referee ought to’ve given a yellow card and a free kick on the pitch, however VAR can not intervene for that. It isn’t a part of the protocol.”
