Controversy at VAR: from “Krupoviesa football”, to the discovery of the ants and not seeing the elephants in the classics event

Let’s start with something obvious. The diagonal camera does not contribute to the rigor of a football that aims to be millimetric. “He Had his big toenail forward,” the narrator will say. Ask Gimnasia de la Plata, if not, they disallowed a goal that would have been their second consecutive victory in the classic against Estudiantes. But he wasn’t the only one. Defense and Justice had a penalty taken away for offside. And in Santiago del Estero there was a crash in the area a few minutes from the end. Go ahead go ahead.

On Sunday around 6.10pm an elephant passed through the river camp. The fact is that, keeping the distance, Yacaré Herrera paid homage to Krupoviesa’s historic shot against Rolfi Montengro. The one in 2006 was a karate throw, it’s true. And, although thinner and a little lower, Millonario’s tackle on Zenón in the 6th minute of the second half deserved a red card. Not just because he knocked him down from behind to cut off a counterattack, but because of the violence. VAR didn’t call and Falcón Pérez just booked him.

Let’s add a detail: after 10 minutes Herrera turned Cavani on the right flank. It wasn’t a VAR action but it was the yellow which, added to the second half, would have meant a red for the Millionaire player.

That Herrera was “playing for free” was so evident that in the 13th minute (7 after the shot for Zenón), Demichelis replaced the former San Lorenzo with Sant’Anna.

17 minutes of the first half were played in the Bosque stadium when the Uruguayan Matías Abaldo, against the right flank and at the height of the central circle, left Ivo Mammini one-on-one with goalkeeper Pincha. The Lobo player resolved in a masterly manner, but the goal was disallowed for a millimeter of offside.

The Professional League shared the VAR audio: “Actual decision, offside,” Silvio Trucco says to Dóvalo for cockroach and they slap the goal away from Madelón’s team.

“The rules are clear in this sense and no matter how close the situation is anticipated, it must be sanctioned,” explains the presenter in the official video.

It could be said that Gimnasia did not win the classic by a narrow margin.

Another controversy arose in the “coupling” between Defense and Justice with Riestra. As soon as the second half began, Halcón’s first attack ended with a penalty in favor after a handball by Joaquín Borja, who had just come on to play the second half at Blanquinegro. But after the VAR review, conducted by Yamil Possi, he was invalidated for offside in the previous action.

The image is eloquent and there doesn’t seem to be an advanced position on the stick that allows the player from Varela’s team to qualify as the stick that more than anyone else will end up with a penalty for Borja. However, when Uvita Fernández was preparing to pass to the center, Possi informed Espinoza that there was an offside

The Avellaneda classic has had its controversies, although in this case there seems to have been a clear decline in the line of not looking for ants in the Libertadores de América. First, in the 19th minute, Fedorco kicks Maravilla Martínez’s heel into the area. The 9 flew into the area but the players’ request was very lukewarm. VAR didn’t call.

Subsequently, towards the end of the match, a much more critical situation arose. Racing were winning 1-0 and the match was over and Ávalos launched a ball into the area which hit Mura’s arm, at the sleeve level. As in the previous situation, such penalties were awarded, but Tello did not blow the whistle and after the review they did not call him.

The rest of the games had their ants too. Push into the Vélez Tigre area which was not sanctioned. And a punch in Central Córdoba-Atlético de Tucumán that could have defined the match in favor of the Dean. The decision was not to change the order. More similar to what happened in the “pure classics” and very different from the millimetric offsides that marked the fate of Gimnasia and Defensa y Justicia.