STOIXIMAN SUPER LEAGUE
print screen
Lanois examines the phases of Matchday 5 of the Stoixmann Super League. Here’s what he had to say about the disallowed Vagianidis goal and PAOK’s fourth goal.
Stephane Lanois, head referee of KED, analyzed the results of the 5th match of the Stoiximan Super League. He mentioned two stages at Panathinaikos – Panserraikos, two stages at Volos – PAOK and he spoke at one stage at Athens Kallithea – AEK.
Athens to the grid in Kallithea – AEK: “In this case, the VAR must check whether the penalty occurred inside or outside the penalty area. The VAR checked the different cameras and found the correct one, allowing him to confirm that the contact was outside the penalty area.”
About Arau Kai in Panathinaikos – Panzeraikos: “In this case, the defender’s arm is completely outside the body. The arm is placed horizontally. With this contact, we expect a penalty because the direction of the ball has changed. It would be a mistake not to suggest a review of the VAR phase.
Panserraikos – On Vagiannidis’ penalty canceled at Panserraikos: “In this case, the referee awarded a penalty, deeming the goalkeeper to have tackled the opponent. VAR detected camera footage showing the goalkeeper touching the ball in front of the attacker. A phase review is recommended to overturn the penalty.”
For Volos’ penalty against PAOK: “The referee gives a penalty, but the wrongdoer is the attacker, not the defender. We would have expected VAR to overturn the wrongful penalty.”
For PAOK’s fourth goal: “This goal should not be allowed. The attacker raised his feet before the goalkeeper kicked the ball. The rules of the game are clear: an indirect free kick is awarded if a player prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands or kicking or attempting to kick while the goalkeeper is in the process of releasing the ball”.
