Why Cristiano Ronaldo’s equaliser for Man United vs Atalanta stood regardless of Mason Greenwood handball

Man United draw with Atalanta

Manchester United have been, as soon as once more, in a position to full some type of a comeback to keep away from shedding within the Champions League.

The Crimson Devils had, earlier than Tuesday, already come from behind to beat Atalanta and Villareal on this season’s Champions League.

And, when going through Atalanta for a second crew this week, United as soon as once more, got here from behind.

The Manchester outfit have been unable to safe the win this time round, however a draw meant that Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s facet have been in a position to preserve prime spot in Group F with simply two video games left to play.

Why Ronaldo’s second purpose stood

In fact, it was that man Cristiano Ronaldo who was important in United rescuing some extent, scoring in harm time of each the primary and second halves of the match.

It was Man United and Ronaldo’s second of the night, although, which did look to trigger some controversy.

This was as a result of, as proven under, the ball fairly clearly hits Mason Greenwood’s arm within the build-up:

So why then, did Ronaldo’s second purpose stand regardless of it being checked by VAR?

Nicely, that’s as a result of the handball guidelines have been modified forward of the 2021/22 season.

As reported by the Premier League again in August, two legal guidelines of the sport have been revised by the Worldwide Soccer Affiliation Board (IFAB), altering how handball is interpreted by match officers.

One among these was on unintended handball within the rapid build-up to a purpose (like Greenwood’s forward of Ronaldo’s purpose).

As per the Premier League:

If an attacking participant’s unintended handball instantly precedes one other participant scoring, the purpose will now be awarded, when final season it was more likely to have been dominated out.

In fact, this then leaves whether or not or not the participant in query unintentionally dealt with the ball open to interpretation. However within the case of Greenwood, VAR clearly believed that it was an accident, therefore why the purpose was in a position to stand.



Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button