Personally, I think both the referee and the VAR probably paid a bit too much attention to the direction the player was moving at the moment of the foul and too little to the direction of the ball. I think PRO will consider this a missed review. The ball was touched forward into wide open space in near the top of the 18. I think the attacking player was very likely to maintain possession if not for the foul. There was no one in distance to reach the ball first, not even the keeper.
True on all points. He's still seeking out specialists to try and get better. Until then he'll continue helping out as VAR.
I don't see how this is a good goal from the various incidents we've seen this year. The pendulum has swung toward helping out the defenders and giving the benefit of the doubt towards the defense. Either way, I think protocol was wrong here as there had to be an OFR here because it wasn't a factual decision of offside or not. It involved a subjective decision of interference. While I'm glad they are awarding a goal on a technicality instead of disallowing one via VAR, I don't think this decision falls within the spirit of VAR. No one can look at this decision and say that a decision to disallow the goal was clearly wrong and no one would expect the goal to be awarded.
Nitpick: No on field review was made. The VAR would have been reviewing and did not consider there was a clear error to send to the R on the field.
Is this clear and obvious... I say not so the VAR should not have gotten involved and if he does the only straw he can possible reach for is this is a Factual error and this is not the case....
It's semantics but the point he was trying to make is that the VAR is reviewing everything, non stop, for 90 minutes.
I’m very late to the party but I’m glad I’m not the only one perplexed by the offside decision in the FC Dallas game. At this point I’m forced to assume PRO is working from a completely different sheet of music than the rest of us when it comes to offside
Yes I think we all understand the VAR terminology but that's not what he was referring to. Do I need to break down the roots, suffixes, and etymology of the word 'review' for you?
Also, from a fan perspective I think this is the biggest confusion for them. They think unless the center referee goes to the monitor that nothing happened and the VAR just isn't doing anything when in fact they are re-watching **cough**reviewing**cough** anything and everything.
This is the point I was trying to make--when people say there was no "review" it sounds like it wasn't looked at, which is incorrect. (My nitpick was colloquial not technical use of the words--the technical use confuses more than it helps, IMO, in this context. I had no doubt that @ManiacalClown knew exactly what happened, but not true for everyone who may be reading here.)
The 2nd video includes the VAR audio which is always fun for us ref nerds. https://www.proassistantreferees.com/week-in-review/2018/5/12/mls-week-15-june-9 It also shows the big difference between the World Cup and MLS. In the World Cup, AVAR2 would have already checked for a possible offside offense while VAR is checking the PK. Only having the one VAR in the leagues could lead to oversights.