Milan v Pisa, Leao’s goal and Pavlovic’s offside: why the goal stood | OneFootball

The episode that sparked the debate in Serie A concerns Milan's lead over Pisa, scored by Rafael Leao after just seven minutes of play.

Milan-Pisa, Leao’s Goal and Pavlovic’s Offside: Here’s Why the Goal Was Allowed

An apparently regular goal, but one that required a lengthy VAR review to assess the position of Strahinja Pavlovic, who was initially considered offside.

In the end, the goal stood: but why was it validated even though the Rossoneri defender was beyond the line of the opposing defenders?

The dynamics of the goal: Pavlovic’s movement and the VAR check

In the 7th minute, Leao received the ball from Ricci on the left wing, took on Bonfanti, cut inside, and unleashed a precise curling right-footed shot from the edge of the area. Pisa’s goalkeeper, Adrian Semper, dived but could not prevent the goal. However, play was stopped: VAR intervened to analyze Pavlovic’s position, who at the moment of the shot was about half a meter offside, moving towards the goalkeeper.

Referee Zufferli, after consulting with the VAR room, confirmed the initial decision: goal stands. An episode that fully enters the debate on the new interpretations of passive offside.

The technical explanation: the goalkeeper is not “influenced”

The decision is based on the new guidelines from the AIA and IFAB 2025, according to which a player in an offside position should not be penalized if he does not clearly interfere with the opponent’s ability to play the ball or does not obviously obstruct the goalkeeper’s line of sight.

In the San Siro case, Pavlovic was indeed beyond the defensive line, but:

he did not touch the ball,

he did not physically impede Semper,

and above all, he did not block the trajectory of Leao’s shot, which came from outside the area and was aimed at the top corner.

The Serbian defender moved in front of the goalkeeper only after the shot was already heading towards goal, an element considered not decisive for the play.

What the AIA 2025 regulations say

The official regulations state:

“A player in an offside position is punishable if he interferes with play or with an opponent, clearly obstructing the line of sight or preventing him from playing the ball.”

In the case of Milan-Pisa, the referee’s assessment was that Pavlovic did not prevent the goalkeeper from “playing” the ball, since the shot was already direct and visible. Consequently, the position was deemed not punishable.

Previous cases in Serie A: a now consolidated trend

Similar episodes have already been seen at the start of this season:

In Parma-Atalanta, Pasalic’s goal was validated despite a teammate being offside in front of the goalkeeper.

In Inter-Cremonese, Dimarco’s goal was regular under similar circumstances.

Clear signs of how the new directives are changing the practical application of the rule, prioritizing the intention of play over mere position.

An increasingly thin line

The Pavlovic case, however, reignites the discussion: where does “influence” end and “non-interference” begin? The new interpretations, designed to make the game flow more smoothly, risk creating a gray area where the referee’s and VAR’s judgment becomes decisive—and subjective. As shown by the words of several coaches, including Alberto Gilardino, many clubs are already studying offensive schemes aimed at exploiting this interpretative space.

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