CTA explains the two controversial plays between Betis and Getafe:

yesterday tuesday afternoon CTAs We aired the video “Review Time” and, as we already talked about in the MD, two of the three in the top category acted as protagonists, the duel last Sunday at the Estadio de la Cartuja, betis and getafe. The match, which ended in a 4-0 win, was directed by recently promoted referee Miguel Sesma.

The two plays occurred in the final moments of the game. We take the lead in the 80th minute thanks to a potential handball from Betic. Deossa. VAR was analyzing the action, but the images did not show that the ball hit the green and white player’s arm. This was the cause of VAR. Pablo González Fuertesthey did not correct the decisions made by the referees on the field. There was not enough discussion to indicate a penalty spot.

According to the CTA, “The key point in this play is the point of contact. If the ball hit the bottom of the arm it would be a penalty, but if it hit the side or top it would not be an infringement. The CTA believes that the referee’s decision and VAR’s non-intervention were correct. This review confirms that there is no evidence that there was a point of contact for the strike in the penalty area. And, for educational purposes, if it was established that the impact occurred on the arm, a penalty should have been awarded in the case of the forearm.”

Just two minutes later, the second action described in the CTA video occurred. It’s about penalties Jenne. Initially, the referee indicated a foul on the edge of the area. The action was continuous and the first impact occurred when the Getafe player was inside the area, prompting VAR to show him the penalty spot. The CTA said: “VAR’s intervention was correct and the referee’s decision has been changed. As this is a purely geographical issue, there is no need to go before the monitor. This will speed up the process and ensure the correct application of the regulations.”