“According to the judge, Gigot kicked the opponent. When the referee makes a decision, the video assistant asks himself the question: is the referee's decision a mistake? Or did he have reasons? He checks with the judge's opinion and looks at the angles from different cameras. The video referees replied that the referee did not make an obvious mistake. When we analyze audio communication, we will sort everything out on the shelves. The contact was in the legs. Gigot continued to move his foot towards the opponent. The judge also saw this contact, ”Kaloshin said on the Match TV channel.
Also, the head of the VAR implementation in Russia admitted that, in his opinion, the second penalty against Spartak was assigned erroneously.
“For me in this situation, the optimal decision was to continue the game and not assign a penalty. The judge's decision is wrong for me. However, the judge appointed a penalty for the fact that Gigot was in contact with the opponent's leg. The video assistant saw it. Such moments are left to the mercy of the judges. There was a contact, because the video assistant considered that this could be considered a violation. The video assistant checks the judge's decision, not the moment. From the point of view of the moment, there was contact. Penalty or not is the referee's decision on the field, ”added Kaloshin.
Earlier, Sozin criticized Spartak for complaints about refereeing.