Ange Postecoglou of Tottenham is unsure whether he would have permitted a goal to make up for the fact that Liverpool were denied a “legitimate goal,” while accepting that.
In the moments following Saturday’s 2-1 victory for Tottenham over Liverpool, Postecoglou dismissed criticism of the use of VAR.
It followed Darren England’s significant gaffe in VAR, which saw Luis Diaz’s goal disallowed for offside despite the winger’s obvious onside position.
The audio from the VAR booth was eventually made available to the public following an investigation undertaken by Liverpool, demonstrating the extent of the incompetence displayed by England and the assistant VAR Dan Cook.
While rumors that the club may want a replay have faded into the background in recent days, a scenario in which Spurs allowed the Reds to score to tie the game might have been more plausible.
Similar circumstances occurred when Leeds played Aston Villa in 2019, with Marcelo Bielsa giving his team the go-ahead to concede after Mateusz Klich scored during an unscheduled injury stoppage.
Postecoglou, though, acknowledged at his Friday press conference that he would not follow suit and disclaimed all liability.
If we want managers to be the ones who decide these kinds of issues, “I just don’t see that,” he added.
“At our football teams, we have a lot of obligations, but we’re not the custodians.
“I wouldn’t act based on my principles in a way that may potentially send your club down.
“At that time, I needed to make a choice within 30 seconds, so if someone told me they could explain everything that happened, it wasn’t going to happen.
“If it’s something obvious, it’s different.
If someone could tell me they could explain everything at that moment, I would be grateful.It’s fairly evident that there was a communication breakdown that resulted in the error, but it wasn’t anything that could be explained simply.
“Because if it were, I would think there would have been more commotion during the game than there was,” the player said. On, it wasn’t going to happen in the 30 seconds I have to select a choice.
“If it’s something obvious, it’s different.
Given that the judgment was made in the 34th minute and became a hot topic shortly after, the idea that there wasn’t much of a “uproar” while the game was still being played appears willfully stupid.
Postecoglou, though, asserts that it was “a little bit of a weird one,” as he “didn’t think anyone had a sense that something significant had happened.”
Everything I say will possibly be interpreted as though we were the victims of a mistake, he continued.
“That’s exactly what we were. The truth is that Liverpool actually scored a goal that wasn’t recognized.
“Obviously, the first thing you wonder is why it isn’t supplied, so you kind of investigate into that. What is malfunctioning? Obviously, there is a problem.
“It soon became apparent that there was a communication error and no misappropriation of the law; rather, there was a problem with integrity.
“That’s what it was—a mistake that cost Liverpool a goal.”
