Uh huh. At this point Walsh has made his decision on field, the VAR could say it’s raining dildos and it would make no difference.
The referee hasn’t mention “position”. Going by that and what you have just rewatched, why would you think he thinks it not DOGSO?
We’ve eliminated “position”. Walsh makes no reference to it.
Look at the shot, with the pace on it and the connection made, does that look obvious to you? Barring some incredibly fortuitous events there is no way that ball is going in.
Comments
The referee hasn’t mention “position”. Going by that and what you have just rewatched, why would you think he thinks it not DOGSO?
There is nothing in the laws about the goalkeeper having a chance of saving it (referee) or the positioning of the keeper (VAR)
They were making up the rules
They deemed that it was handball, therefore he deliberately made his body bigger, therefore putting himself at risk of handball.
Yet they tried to say it was non deliberate.
If that was so, then it wasn’t a penalty
Look at the shot, with the pace on it and the connection made, does that look obvious to you? Barring some incredibly fortuitous events there is no way that ball is going in.
I again ask you to point out in the laws a where the keepers position (VAR team) or the chance to save (referee Walsh) is a DOGSO consideration
Incidentally, the attacking team doesn’t even need to had shot to consider DOGSO