University of Chile she is attentive to every detail in the context of her fight to avoid relegation. Not even in the face of a victory does that review cease. After the victory over Palestino, in the student club they were not satisfied with the performance of Nicolás Gamboa, who was part of the VOR, the booth in which the VAR is administered, and, after a detailed review of the judge’s decisions, raised a note of claim against the judge before the ANFP Referees Commission, regarding one of the determinations he made in the duel against Palestino, in which the Blues won 1-2 and obtained three units that could be vital to maintain the category. The annoyance increased after the ANFP announced that Gamboa will be the judge for the classic against Universidad Católica, for the Chile Cup.
“The following claim and call for attention to the arbitration performance of the Palestino vs. University of Chilewhere the erroneous and distant interpretation of the Laws of the Game is evident, which reveals a failed and unacceptable decision, which profoundly affects the credibility of the professionals who intervened in the decision that annulled a legitimate goal of our team”, says the writing. The U seeks to raise the level of the judges and, incidentally, warns the concern that exists in the club for the errors that may occur considering that the blues are playing for relegation.
The protest focuses on a specific play. “At minute 11, player No. 19 of Universidad de Chile touches the ball to give it to his teammate, No. 11, who, at the time of the last contact with the ball, by his teammate, is at least to cm behind the penultimate opponent. Which, very clearly, IS NOT AN OFFSIDE POSITION, since no part of his body is closer to the opponent’s goal line than the ball and the penultimate opponent. Therefore, it cannot be an OFFSIDE INFRINGEMENT. Even if it were at the same height, which is not the case, it would not be either”, argue the laity. The players mentioned are the strikers Ronnie Fernandez Y Christian Palacios.
There starts an exhibition that considers the literal transcription of the rules of the game regarding the aforementioned infraction, accompanied by images taken from the television broadcast. After the expert opinion, a conclusion emerges. They ensure that Palacios was not in an offside position, disallowing a valid goal. They blame the judges Piero Maza, the VAR referee Nicolás Gamboa and the AVAR assistant referee, Sebastián Pérez.
The analysis then focuses on the decision-making process. “The first thing that is observed is that the Assistant is not with the penultimate opponent, he is mistakenly moved forward than the penultimate. There is already a first error. Then, when drawing the line, it can be seen that they took the Assistant, who is misplaced, as the axis in the background. And the virtual stroke ends at the Assistant’s feet. It may be a coincidence when throwing the blue and red strokes, which are the ones that define each position, but it has no logical place, since, when looking at the width of both strokes, they start almost at the height of the feet of the Assistant and if we look down, it ends almost in the middle of the cutting cloth, which reveals the drawing of the grass, that is, almost two meters displaced. Clearly, the lines that the VAR referees drew are poorly drawn”, expose the blues.
A line drawn on a general shot of the playing field, also on television, tries to prove the theory. “Here we show, approximately, the line that was drawn in the match where our clear goal was annulled. It is indisputable that it is not parallel to the correct line and considering that it is professional football, the behavior of the VAR Booth, which was directed by Mr. Nicolás Gamboa with the collaboration of Mr. Sebastián Pérez, is unacceptable”, they point out in the club.