Friday, April 19, 2024
Stay in control of your digital finances with ledger live customizable portfolio views, tailoring your dashboard to fit your investment strategy. Зарегистрируйтесь в казино Вавада зеркало и воспользуйтесь зеркалом для стабильного доступа к играм. Получите бонус после регистрации и сразу начинайте выигрывать! Пройдите регистрацию в казино вавада и начните свое азартное приключение с приветственного бонуса. Вход в мир больших выигрышей уже ждет вас!
FeaturedThe Definitive Angle

The Definitive Angle: NWSL Week 1

The Definitive Angle is PRO’s analysis of the week’s Video Review use in NWSL.

Week 1 overview
There were two Video Reviews during Week 1.

LA vs NJY: Review for goal (foul in APP) – not given

What Happened: A goal was scored by Jun Endo (LA) and awarded by the on-field officials.

When the VAR checked the footage of the incident, he saw that when Dani Weatherholt (LA) was waiting for the ball, which had been chested to her in the middle of the field, she was aware that an opponent was approaching to intercept the ball.

Just before the opponent arrived within playing distance of the ball, Weatherholt, in an attempt to shield the ball, established her position by reaching her left foot away from her normal standing position into her opponent’s path and tripped her.

The VAR recommended a Video Review for the goal to be disallowed because of the foul in the APP. After seeing the footage at the RRA, the referee agreed, disallowed the goal, and restarted play with a direct free kick.

On-field decision: Goal.
Type of review: No goal – foul in APP.
Final decision after review: No goal and direct free kick.
Length of review: 2:50.

PRO’s Opinion: This was a subjective decision as some see the action as a trip and others as a fair challenge because the player used their body to shield the ball. For a video review to be recommended the incident needs to be clearly wrong.

LA vs NJY: Review for penalty kick (foul challenge) – not given

What Happened: Svava Gudmundsdóttir (NJY) went down in the penalty area after a challenge by goalkeeper Didi Haracic (LA). The referee did not identify an offense in real-time and allowed play to continue.

When the VAR checked the footage, he determined that the Angel City goalkeeper had missed making contact with the ball with her left hand when she dove to her left. Instead, she made contact on the foot of Gudmundsdóttir, causing her to go to ground.

The VAR recommended a Video Review for a penalty because he saw impactful contact between Haracic’ right hand and the attacker’s left ankle.

After seeing the footage at the RRA, the referee agreed and awarded the penalty. He also issued Haracic with a yellow card for denial of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity while making an attempt to play the ball.

On-field decision: Play on.
Type of review: Penalty kick.
Final decision after review: Penalty and yellow card (DOGSO).
Length of review: 2:30.

PRO’s Opinion: This was a good use of the Video Review system to rectify a clear and obvious error.

1Win Casino'daki slot makinelerinde şansınızı denemeye hazır mısınız? Şanslı bir kazanan olun ve sadece birkaç tıklamayla hesabınıza gerçek para aktarın.

Interested in gambling sites not based in the UK? These non UK based gambling sites bring exclusive games and offers. Dive into the action now!

online pokies real money