Monaco v PSG: VAR goes rogue with a bizarre explanation 🚀 | OneFootball

During the Monaco/Paris Saint-Germain match, the violent challenge by Lamine Camara (21 years old) on Lucas Chevalier (24 years old) had already set everyone abuzz. Le Parisien revealed the words of the video referee, who was supposed to assist Clément Turpin (43 years old). He offered a justification that was, to say the least, bewildering after a foul that should have warranted a red card.

It’s hard to imagine anything more surreal than this sequence. Hearing the video referee explain “the impact is low” and mention a “slight twist” only to conclude that the “review is over” borders on total denial of what actually happened. Lamine Camara’s foul, studs up, Lucas Chevalier’s ankle twisting, is objectively one of those that falls into the automatic red card category. And yet, nothing. Not a warning, not even a request for Mr. Turpin to review the footage. We’re talking about a system meant to correct obvious errors, which instead just contextualizes a twist as if it were a trivial anatomical detail. The explanation is outlandish, almost disarming, and raises a simple question: how can we avoid repetition if the cold analysis is already missing the point? In this case, simply acknowledging the errors is no longer enough; we need to understand how we got here in the first place.

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇫🇷 here.