Enzo Maresca’s Chelsea appeared to have doubled their lead at Stamford Bridge when Caicedo struck a powerful volley from 15 yards out. ..Continue Reading
However, the goal was quickly sent to VAR, and after further review, defender Levi Colwill was deemed to be in an offside position, as several players were positioned across the 18-yard box.
The Premier League Match Centre later issued a statement addressing the highly debated incident.
Taking to X, they wrote: “VAR checked the referee’s call of goal – and established that Colwill was in an offside position in the build-up and recommended that the goal was disallowed.”
Here’s how suporters on social media reacted to Caicedo’s goal being ruled out by VAR.
One said: “Genuine question. If VAR is for clear and obvious errors then how come it took them 4 minutes to find the clear and obvious error in this?”
A second wrote: “Not sure that one should’ve been disallowed tbh,” while a third commented: “Game’s gone. There’s no way that’s offside.”
A fourth said: “If you cannot 100% conclude it’s offside then the goal should stand. Automated offside is the only way to solve this.”
A fifth wrote: “You literally can’t see anyone’s feet in that still for the offside. SO HOW CAN THEY EVEN DRAW LINES FOR OFFSIDE?!?” and a sixth added: “This is in no way shape or form an exact science, it’s utterly pointless. VAR has honestly ruined football for me.”
Referee Anthony Taylor and assistant referees Jarred Gillett and Mark Scholes were certainly busy in the second half.
Just after Caicedo’s goal was disallowed, Tottenham had a strike of their own ruled out when Pape Matar Sarr was deemed to have made contact with Caicedo’s knee before scoring.
A statement from the Premier League read: “VAR checked the referee’s call of goal for Tottenham – and deemed there was a foul by Sarr on Caicedo in the build-up and recommended an on-field review.
“The referee then overturned the original decision and the goal was disallowed, with Sarr then cautioned for a reckless challenge.”
