Flying Eze and its trusted partners need your
permission to store and access cookies, unique identifiers, personal data, and information on your
browsing behaviour on this device. This only applies to Flying Eze. You don’t have to accept, and
you
can change your preferences at any time via the Privacy Options link at the bottom of this screen. If
you don’t accept, you may will still see some personalised ads and content.
Cookies, device identifiers, or other information can be stored or accessed on
your device for the purposes presented to you.
Ads and content can be personalised based on a profile. More data can be added
to better personalise ads and content. Ad and content performance can be
measured. Insights about audiences who saw the ads and content can be derived.
Data can be used to build or improve user experience, systems and software.
Precise geolocation and information about device characteristics can be used.
If you don’t want to accept, please select Read More option below where you can also see how and
why your data may be used. You can also see where we or our partners claim a legitimate interest and
object to the processing of your data.
DUTCH VAR Pol van Boekelâs controversial decision to rule out Harry Kaneâs late would-be winner for offside was very, very tight.
The fact the ball deflected off Sporting defender Flavio Nazinho before it reached Tottenham’s Kane is irrelevant because it was not a deliberate play.
Secondly, the fact the ball went backwards off Emerson Royalâs head before it reached Kane does not matter either, the direction of the ball never does.
It is whether Kane was closer to the goal line than the ball and the second-most rear defender when it was played.
If Kane was judged to have been behind the ball, he would have been onside.
Technology isnât foolproof and can we say Kane was definitely in front of the ball when Royal headed it? Iâm not sure.
It took around four minutes to check and if it is taking that long we shouldnât be disallowing goals like that.
It was very difficult to tell if Kane was a toenail in front or behind the ball.
If thatâs what the VAR is looking for and it takes four minutes, you can find whatever you want to find.Â
What Antonio Conte said
Boss Antonio Conte was fuming with the decision and even received his marching orders.
The Italian hit out at VAR, saying it is “doing a lot of damage”.
Conte told BT Sport:Â “I think the ball was in front of Kane and the goal is a goal. Yeah. I donât understand the line they put. It very difficult to comment on this decision.
“VAR is doing a lot of damage. I want to see if in another stadium of a big team if they are ready to disallow this type of goal. Iâd like to know this.
“A lot of injustice. I donât like this type of situation. I see not positive things.
“The second half was positive and we played with a great intensity. We deserved to win but we know what happened.
“I donât understand why we have to get something from the next game when we can finish the qualification in this game. When you invent this type of situation, you create a lot of damage of the club. Also problems.”