Speaking after the match, right-back Matt Doherty added: “I thought because it went backwards and hit a defender it was a different phase of play. I’ll have to look at the rule book. A few of us don’t have a clue what happened.”
Conte was unequivocal in his belief that the goal should have stood, with the Italian claiming that Kane was behind the ball and could not have been in an offside position.
“I think the ball was in front of Kane and the goal is a goal,” Conte said. “I don’t understand the line they put [on the screen]. It is very difficult to comment on this decision. Var is doing a lot of damage. I want to see if in another stadium of a big team if they are ready to disallow this type of goal. I’d like to know this.”
Was it the right decision?
The direction of travel of the ball is not referenced in the offside laws of the International Football Association Board, who determine the rules of the games. What it does state is that a player can be put onside if an opponent deliberately touches the ball, so the Var’s job was to decide whether Nazinho has intentionally made contact with Royal’s header.
Law 11 states: “A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by… gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar, match official or an opponent.
“A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball, including by deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage.”
Therefore, as soon as Van Boekel decided that Nazinho had not played the ball deliberately, Kane’s position became offside and the goal was controversially but correctly chalked off.
What could happen to Conte?
Antonio Conte could face up to two matches banned from the touchline for his red card against Sporting Lisbon on Wednesday night, under Uefa disciplinary regulations.
Uefa regulations, article 15, specify a two-match suspension for players or officials for “insulting or directing abusive language at a match official”. It remains to be seen whether Uefa take action for Conte’s questioning of the honesty of Dutch referee Danny Makkelie and his team of officials. “I don’t see honesty in this type of situation [this game],” Conte said after the match. “When I don’t see this, I become really, really upset.”
Football Association regulations outline that a player or manager can be charged for questioning the integrity of the referee under rule E3 if they are determined to “imply bias, attack the officials’ integrity”. Any Uefa charge of that nature would take its lead from Makkelie’s report to the governing body.
