+x+xHad a late thought (not deliberate - just came to me I am afraid).
VAR can only overturn clear and obvious errors.
I think the assistant simply missed the Victory contact and flagged offside, which was accepted and called by the onfield ref.
VAR looked at it and decided that it could be argued on some level that it was a combination of reflexive and instinctive reaction to the bumbling of Buhagiar by Nigro, could possibly have been called 'not deliberate' and therefore not a clear and obvious error. Ref and assistant got it wrong on one set of facts, VAR upheld it on a loose interpretation of other facts. Best result would have been show the ref the video with Nigro's contact and he probably would have overturned it himself.
Nothing new to learn for refs. Something new to learn in the VAR box about giving the ref the info to review their own decision. If the ref had called it a goal VAR would have upheld that decision too.
I can sleep with that.
I thought offside was considered to be a matter of fact rather than an interpretation, and so not covered by the clear and obvious error scenario that is considered (although sometimes it appears to be only when it suits!) for things like fouls and handballs. For example, if someone is offside by 1 cm then they are still offside, even though a decision that close could be considered not to be a clear and obvious error.
The line is black and white for where offside is drawn I agree. But the parts where a player in a clear offside position may or may not actually be considered offside based on their impact, involvement and advantage on the play before they may be played onside by an opponent is far too subjective.
For a ref on the run to adjudicate on multiple points about the 'deliberate' playing of a ball, on top of every other moving part in the melee, is clearly going to result in decisions based on their experience, their refs (brain) muscle memory, their feel for what is happening in that moment - and they are going to make a judgement. That to me is a valid judgement whatever decision is made as it represents what they see in that moment. For VAR to try to introduce fact into that is impossible - there will always be two sides to every involvement when the question is about reflex, reaction, expectation and the like. VAR must always support the refs initial decision in that because it cannot find a clear and obvious error in a subjective decision. The only thing VAR can adjudge clearly is information like we saw in Victory v Jets - who touched it last and who was in a potential offside position physically at that moment.
I don't know all the limitations on VAR involvement and powers, but to me VAR should have looked at the footage, noticed that Nigro touched the ball last and not Buhagiar, then advised the onfield ref to review the footage and see if that changes what he thought he saw. VAR is right to identify the Jets player up front as potentially offside - that is the end of its black and white role and as such really the end of its
decision making role. Drawing attention to the Nigro touch would allow the ref to make an informed decision as it may have been a clear and obvious error that the ref missed it. Ref can stick or change depending on whether that was a key factor in his decision. The end result is still the refs call and therefore the right one with all the relevant information. The subjective side cannot be ruled on by VAR - they are not the one making all the other onfield calls in that game so their 'opinion' is irrelevant. That to me is why VAR upheld the refs call when their decision should have been to call him over to look - instead of actually deciding it.
As a side point, I do acknowledge the validity of the opinion I have read in here many times - if they are not gaining any advantage by being offside then why are they standing there...?