[ad_1]
Two Juventus-Benevento slow motion episodes that happen at so many different moments in the game: the first true at the end of the first half, the second in the second half. In both cases the protagonist is Foulon, defender of the Samnites. But it will be the second episode, quite sensational, which will elicit the biggest protests from the Bianconeri. Which? It is about Church that falls in the area after Foulon’s own intervention but for the referee there are no details to award the penalty. As for the other, however, it occurs on the occasion of a cross made by Dejan Kulusveski and which seems to be deflected by a Benevento player with his arm. The referee grants the penalty, but is forced to review his decision because he is called to the Var from the control room. Let’s look at both of them in detail.
Chiesa falls into the area after Foulon’s intervention, Abisso releases her
Juve asks for a penalty for Foulon’s intervention on Chiesa. The Benevento defender is on the ground and, also considering the movement of his body, tries to prevent the opponent from stopping his run. The episode takes place at the height of the left corner of the Samnites’ penalty area: the Juventus attacking outside is inside the perimeter when they face the Giallorossi player quite awkwardly.
For Abisso there are no extremes to grant the penalty despite the fact that the Benevento defender seems to cause the fall of the former Viola as soon as he enters the area. Why this decision of the race director and why did the Var not intervene? The penalty could have been there, but the referee – this is the hypothetical explanation – must have evaluated the dynamics of the action as unintentional: in essence, he did not consider Foulon’s fault as voluntary that, having fallen, he could not stop. the movement. Explanation that is not convincing at all, the penalty could have been there because in fact the Church could not continue the race towards the Benevento gate. Did Abyss view the Church movement as a simulation? Perhaps, in this case, he makes one more mistake: he should have warned the player. Another issue related to the lack of intervention of the Var. If the referee – who always has the last word on the matter – is determined in the assessment of the episode, the decision remains the one made on the field.
The Var intervenes, Abisso is corrected: it is not a penalty for Juve
It’s the 35th minute, Juventus under pressure and in control of the game. The bianconeri are in offensive projection in search of the goal from the advantage. Benevento defends himself as best he can but, ten minutes from the end of the first half, he runs the risk of capitulating: there is a cross made by Kuluvesvki, the trajectory of the ball stops nevertheless – at least this is the effect obtained from the images a normal speed – of a Foulon arm. This is not the case, because the sphere will hit you on the side, with the arm close to the body and not at all in an inappropriate position with respect to the movement or the torso. For the referee, however, it is a penalty kick. Something is wrong, as evidenced by the images seen by the agents during the analysis.
What happened and why did the race director change his mind? Here’s the dynamics of the action that led Abyss to revoke the maximum punishment awarded to the hosts. Reminded by Var, the referee corrects his decision: he reviews the dynamics of the action in slow motion on the pitch and revokes the maximum punishment of the hosts.
Goal annulled to Cristiano Ronaldo: he is offside
Another slow-motion episode, this time the Var’s intervention is not required because the race director immediately notices the irregularity. In the 38th minute of the first half, Cristiano Ronaldo scored by taking advantage of a Kulusevski cross from the left but CR7’s goal was disallowed by the Portuguese’s obvious offside position.
Montipò, hands out of the area: just punishment, he is not cautioned
At 44 of the first half, the Benevento goalkeeper intervened in a low start on Chiesa. He does not commit any fault but at the moment he drags the ball out of the area. Only the punishment awarded to Juventus but against him the referee does not show the yellow card.
The reason for the lack of action? The intervention begins inside the penalty area and then with the body ends outside the perimeter. So there is no will on the part of the extreme defender.
[ad_2]
