The situations which are explained, are only situations in which VAR correctly or incorrectly intervened or did not intervened, or did not intervene, in relation to the referees decision, according to the VAR protocol.
PARALIMNI – PAFOS F.C, 85th minute
REF INITIAL DECISION: PLAY ON
VAR: VAR INTERVENTION , ON FIELD REVIEW – PENALTY KICK – HANDBALL
REFEREE AFTER ON FIELD REVIEW: PENALTY KICK
EXPLANATION: THE BALL COMES FROM THE CORNER KICK. DEFENDER PLAYER TRYING TO HEAD THE BALL AND CLEARLY TOUCHED THE BALL WITH HIS HAND WHICH WAS OUT OF THE BODY. REFEREE DID NOT SEE THIS SITUATION AND DECIDED TO PLAY ON. VAR CHECKED THE SITUATION, FOUND THE CLEAR EVIDENCE FOR HANDBALL OFENCE AND INTERVENED ACCORDING TO THE VAR PROTOCOL , CORRECTLY. REFEREE AFTER ON FIELD REVIEW CHANGED THE DECISION CORRECTLY.
CONSIDERATION FOR VAR INTERVENTION:
-HAND/ARM OUT OF THE BODY MADE A BODY BIGGER
-HAND IN UNNATURAL POSITION
-BALL CLEARLY HITS THE HAND
PARALIMNI – PAFOS F.C, 32nd minute
REF INITIAL DECISION: GOAL
VAR: VAR INTERVENTION / VAR REVIEW/ CANSELLED THE GOAL- OFFSIDE
REFEREE AFTER VAR REVIEW : CANSELLED THE GOAL /OFFSIDE
EXPLANATION: ASSISTANT REFEREE AND REFEREE FOLLOWED THE OFFSIDE VAR PROCEDURE, DELAY THE FLAG IN THE VERY TIGHT SITUATION DECIDED TO PLAY ON AND AWARDED THE GOAL. VAR CHECKED THE SITUATION, PERFORMED THE OFFSIDE LINE PROCEDURE CORRECTLY, AND USING TRIANGULATION METHOD CORRECT SOLUTION OBTAINED BY SOFTER. VAR INTERVENED ACCORDING TO THE VAR PROTOCOL, CORRECTLY. REFEREE AFTER VAR REVIEW CHANGED THE DECISION, CORRECTLY.
OMONOIA – AEL, 84th minute
REF INITIAL DECISION: PENALTY KICK
VAR: VAR INTERVENTION / ON FIELD REVIEW / CANSELED THE PENALTY – INDIRECT FREE KICK AND YELLOW CARD.
REFEREE AFTER VAR REVIEW: CANSELLED THE PENALTY – INDIRECT FREE KICK AND YELLOW CARD.
EXPLANATION: ATTACKER PLAYER AND GOALKEEPER TRY TO GET THE BALL IN THE PENALTY BOX. ATTACKER COMES TO THE BALL FIRST, MOVES IT IN THE SIDE AND THAN MAKES A CLEAR MOVEMENT WITH HIS RIGHT LEG TOWARDS TO THE GOALKEEPER TO MAKE A CONTACT AND DECIVE THE REFEREE TO AWARDED THE PENALTY KICK. REFEREE FROM HIS POSITION DIDN’T SEE IT CLEARLY THAT MOVEMENT OF THE ATTACKER AND AWARDED THE PENALTY KICK . VAR CHECKED THE SITUATION, FOUND THE CLEAR EVIDENCE FOR SIMULATION OF THE ATTACKER AND INTERVENED CORRECTLY ACCORDING TO THE VAR PROTOCOL. REFEREE AFTER ON FIELD REVIEW CHANGED THE DECISION , CORRECTLY.
DOXA – NEA SALAMINA, 64th minute
REF INITIAL DECISION: PLAY ON
VAR: NO INTERVENTION.
EXPLANATION: DEFENDER PLAYER PLAYS THE BALL WITH HIS KNEE WHICH THEN HITS HIS ARM. REFEREE CLEARLY SAW THE SITUATION AND DECIDED PLAY ON, CORRECTLY.VAR CHECKED THE SITUATION AND FOLLOWING THE VARPROTOCOL INSTRUCTION DID NOT INTERVENED CORRECTLY.
CONSIDERATION FOR NO VAR INTERVENTION:
-THE BALL HITS THE PLAYERS ARM AFTER PLAYING WITH HIS KNEE
-NO ADDITIONAL MOVEMENT BY THE ARM
