Massive Ilzer criticism of the rule interpretation of the VAR

For visual reasons alone, Tomi Horvat’s goal certainly deserved recognition.

According to Christian Ilzer, this is also due to technical reasons.

Even though SK Sturm Graz in Schlager Rapid scored a last-minute goal from David Affengruber (<<"Das merkt man sich">>>) still defeated 1:0, the Styrian coach comes back angrily after the end of the game to the controversial scene in the first half.

“A very clear goal! Absolutely clear!”, the 45-year-old was annoyed.

Referee Walter Altmann, who denied the goal after studying video, contradicts this on “Sky”: “The goalkeeper’s view was obstructed by the offside opponent, so it was a right decision. From a technical point of view, it was offside.”

Ilzer: “Hedl would never have kept it”

Specifically, it is about the behavior of Emanuel Emegha, which the two gentlemen interpret very differently.

Ilzer, on the other hand, says: “I also saw that from the behind-the-goal camera. Emegha runs through the field of vision, but is never in the field of fire. The shot misses Emegha by two meters and Niklas Hedl could never have stopped it – it doesn’t matter. whether an Emegha jumps through the frame or not.”

What bothers Ilzer in particular is the obviously different interpretation of the rules that local referees show.

As a specific example, the East Styrian cites the LASK winning goal in the ÖFB Cup last weekend against Austria Klagenfurt, which was recognized even though Marin Ljubicic defender Thorsten Mahrer was visibly irritated.

Everyone needs to see the unicorn

“For me, Ljubicic’s to Mahrer was much more irritating than Emegha’s to Hedl. Apparently, you shouldn’t irritate a goalie, but you can irritate a central defender. I simply lack clarity in the rules,” Ilzer says in amazement and demands:

“You have to simplify that again, because of course it’s also difficult for the referees. But there is no consensus. In situations that decide the game, however, you simply have to see the unicorn. It’s not okay for one person to say one thing and another to say that.”

Ultimately, this scene could definitely have been decisive in the game if Sturm hadn’t been granted another goal.



Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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