Yeah, I thought they explained the difference pretty well. I don't agree with the parsing of it that way, but the explanation does show why one was called goal and the other was called back.
Which is a perfect example of why the offsides rule has become something nobody understands. Either both goals count because both goals resulted in a deflection off an opposing player or both goals are disallowed because of a player in an offsides position. Not one counts because the defender made a play for the ball (something you would expect a defender to do automatically) and the other doesnt because the ball deflected off an opposing player. Soccer is getting more and more like the NFL where the intricacies of getting one call right ruin the game. If your rules of why a player is offsides is larger than the US tax cide, maybe you need to rethink the rule.
Actually, they should have shown both offsides goals from the LAFC - RSL game so that people could see how screwed up the offsides rule has become. As it was, they didnt because they didnt want to show how stupid their explanation is on why one counted and another didnt.
The one where LAFC scored wasn't shown because the whole point of the segment is to show how VAR was used. There was no question on the LAFC so there was no review, and hence not shown.
I thought that the referee halted play to hear from the booth on that one. I think the booth reviewed it but never looked at Rimando being drawn out of position by the active offsides player. That’s why I called it an example of VAR being improperly utilized.