Here is the first replay of the “foul” on Tierna Davidson that I could find. There are several angles shown. For the best pics of the leadup to the “foul,” pause at 2:23, 2:20, and 2:32. The picture quality isn’t good, but the angle is clear. Tierna Davidson clearly had the inside track to the ball. She clearly reached the ball a step or two ahead of the Canadian. The Canadian player clearly comes in from behind. If that is a foul, the call should have gone against the Canadian player.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqCiE_J2AFI
The ref awarded a goal kick. I’d be ok with that.
The Canadians protested and the VAR ref awarded a foul on Davidson, apparently because her arms flew up and made incidental contact with the Canadian player’s head as Davidson was hit from behind.
I will let the rules hawks debate the point, but generally speaking, when you are rear-ended by someone coming in from behind, the fault goes to the person who initiated contact. Davidson had a step advantage before the Canadian player came in. She was called for fouling a player behind her and out of her vision, as her arms came up to catch her balance.
Bad call.
Bad call by the VAR ref who overruled the correct call on the field.
Bad calls happen from time to time in all sports. It is a shame when a game is decided by a bad call. Soccer is particularly vulnerable to this because scoring is so low. In this case, the bad call produced the only score in the game.
A strike against VAR as well, by the way.
Typo: pause at 2:23, 2:28 (not 2:20) and 2:32.
Davidson had position. She had won the ball. Her arms came up by reflex as she was hit from behind. How that is a foul on Davidson, I don’t know.
Thank You again, FRiend!