The CTA confirms the cancellation of Lo Celso's goal against
By OnzeActu · · 4 min read
The CTA publishes its explanatory video: the cancellation of Lo Celso's goal is considered correct, while the Güler–Peque incident is not studied due to the lack of clear images.
Why it matters
The cancellation of Lo Celso's goal has sparked debate among LaLiga football fans, as it raises questions about the use of VAR in similar situations. The Technical Refereeing Committee confirmed that the assistant referee's intervention was justified, which could influence the perception of refereeing decisions in future matches, particularly those involving clubs like FC Barcelona and Real Madrid.
Context
Lo Celso, a key player in his team, had his goal ruled out due to a handball from Cucho Hernández, which highlighted the importance of refereeing decisions in Spanish football. This situation could also affect team dynamics and players' confidence in refereeing decisions in future matches.
Key points
- The CTA confirms the cancellation of Lo Celso's goal against.
- The CTA publishes its explanatory video: the cancellation of Lo Celso's goal is considered correct, while the Güler–Peque incident is not studied due to the lack of clear images.
- The CTA has been canceled by the law of Lo Celso before Barça and has not been analyzed by the code of Güler.
According to the CTA, the action was not noticed by the central referee Ricardo de Burgos on the field. It was the intervention of video assistant referee Del Cerro Grande that led to the official being invited to consult the monitor to review the sequence. After examination, the Committee finds that the arm played a role in the action and that the offense is visible in the same video sequence. The CTA therefore confirms that the cancellation of the goal was justified and validates the decision taken on the field.
The broadcast of this sequence by the CTA aims to provide transparency on the control process and the way in which the VAR and the main referee interact during a contentious action. In this specific case, the mechanism led to correcting an action not seen in real time and applying the rule on the use of the arm in the game.
Image
On the other hand, the Committee chose not to analyze another controversial scene mentioned this weekend: Güler's elbow on “Peque” during the Real Madrid–Sevilla match. The CTA explains that it did not have sufficiently clear images to carry out a reliable review of the incident. Due to a lack of usable visual evidence, the footage was not retained for further examination.
This dual communication from the CTA illustrates the limits and strengths of using video: when the images are clear, they make it possible to correct obvious errors; when they are vague or incomplete, the possibilities for intervention are reduced. For clubs and supporters, the publication of these analyzes is also a way to better understand why certain decisions are confirmed while others cannot be reviewed.
The world of football continues to closely observe the use of VAR and the criteria applied by refereeing bodies. The CTA continues its transparency work by regularly publishing these summaries, in order to explain its choices and limit gray areas around contested decisions.
The rest
Following this decision, La Liga teams, including FC Barcelona and Sevilla, may be more vigilant regarding contentious actions on the pitch. Players like Lo Celso and Cucho Hernández will also need to be aware of the implications of their actions, as every detail can be scrutinized by VAR. The next LaLiga matches will therefore be closely scrutinized by referees and analysts.
Frequently asked questions
What happened with Lo Celso's goal against Barça?
The Technical Refereeing Committee confirmed the cancellation of Lo Celso's goal due to a previous handball from Cucho Hernández, which had not been perceived by the central referee.
Who confirmed the cancellation of Lo Celso's goal?
The cancellation of Lo Celso's goal was confirmed by the Technical Refereeing Committee (CTA).
Why did the CTA decide to analyze the cancellation of the goal now?
The CTA disseminated this analysis to provide transparency on the control process and the operation of the VAR during contentious actions.
What are the consequences of
cancellation of Lo Celso's goal?
The cancellation of the goal validates the decision taken on the pitch and underlines the importance of VAR intervention to correct errors not seen in real time.
Why didn't the CTA analyze Güler's nudge?
The CTA chose not to analyze Güler's elbow strike because it did not have sufficiently clear images to carry out a reliable review of the incident.