Just realised that the ref blew for the foul after the goal was scored. So VAR couldn't intervene because of why? Just wondering as it feeds back to May.
VAR could intervene but if a player falls to the ground after contact and the ref deems it foul play what can VAR do? It was probably a harsh decision but the questionable bit is whether the contact was enough to be considered a foul and the ref has made a decision on that, VAR isn't there to make him change his mind on subjective calls, it's to highlight things he's missed. If Cash had actually tripped over his own feet and there was no contact VAR could've stepped in but once they can see the Feyenoord player nudge him their job is done.
I think that's his point. There's no real benefit in not giving the goal. Then if on review, it's a foul on Cash then VAR will reverse it.
Just like Rogers against Man Utd - give the goal, and if you need to chalk it off then fine. But at least give yourself the option.
I agree on the last bit completely, I was just pointing out why VAR didn't change the decision to disallow this one or send him to the screen, because it was out of the remit of the review system.
It's the opposite to our one at Man U in both ways because then the Ref blew early for no real reason and, if he hadn't but had then disallowed it, VAR would've been able to step in when it became clear that it was a perfectly legitimate tackle. The important bit though is that last night was VAR working, and being used, correctly (same for the yellow/red decision as well to be fair), our one last season was just really poor decision making from the ref to back himself into a corner where he had no options to fix his mistake.
