The reason for the disqualification of Mikel Merino’s goal in the Champions League match between Arsenal and PSG

The reason for the disqualification of Mikel Merino’s goal in the Champions League match between Arsenal and PSG Arsenal has been provided with an explanation for the reason why

 

 

 

VAR nullified Mikel Merino’s equalizer against Paris Saint-Germain on Tuesday. Ousmane Dembele scored from the fringe of the area after Khvicha Kvaratskhelia’s excellent play down the left, giving Luis Enrique’s team the lead against the Gunners after just four minutes.

 

 

 

 

This lead was maintained until halftime. Not long after the resumption, Mikel Arteta’s team believed they were level after a free-kick from Declan Rice struck the back post. Merino then headed in uncontested. However, the goal was disallowed due to offside following a protracted VAR review. Mark Clattenburg, a former Premier League referee who is currently employed by Prime Video,

 

 

 

 

elucidated the reason for Arsenal’s goal being disallowed. “When Declan Rice takes the free kick, the Arsenal players are returning to an onside position. It is important to remember that Merino does not have to be in an offside position.”If the defender’s ability to play the ball is obstructed by the players, the judgment will be considered offside, and it will be highly subjective.

 

 

 

 

Arsenal was controversially denied a penalty earlier in the match. The Gunners were able to reestablish possession of the ball in the PSG area before Mikel Merino was injured while attempting to take a shot. Nevertheless, the replays revealed that Joao Neves was able to get a last-ditch toe to the ball shortly before Merino was about to fire.

 

 

 

 

Following the incident, referee Slavko Vincic’s hand movement within the Emirates Stadium initially caused confusion, leading supporters to believe that a penalty had been awarded. Clattenburg provided an explanation for the correctness of the non-penalty decision.

 

 

 

 

“The Arsenal fans are perplexed by the referee’s appearance of pointing to the spot,” he stated. “It is evident that he is in an extremely advantageous position, as the defender clearly touches the ball before the forwards make any contact.” Consequently, the decision to continue playing is the correct one; however, the referee’s appearance of pointing to the location may cause confusion for all players.