Notice at 1:50 Taylor asks "Is there any contact." Gillet ignores the question, then in the walk through tells him there is no contact (not true), and then that Havertz has initiated the contact. Taylor decides within 5 seconds that its the truth. I do not think this is a proper process.Okay, so, if someone is running to the box with the ball, you can put your leg or body or whatever in front of him no matter how late you are and don't hit the ball, and it is not a foul.
What if you put the leg there and your leg is in the air? The other player runs to it, it's their fault? No tackle?
This is pretty interesting. In basketball if you're even a bit late having any own movement, and not standing still, it's the defender's fault.
The VAR Gillet says there is minimal contact, but does he realize that minimal contact will affect the running a lot when you're at full speed?
Also one claim has been Havertz putting his leg left to hit Bissaka. But this is an assumption claiming to know how legs move at full speed. It could have also hit anyway. Havertz could have assumed his leg is already ahead of Bissaka as he can't see backwards.
PGMOL's Howard Webb reveals the decision-making process for incidents such as Kai Havertz's overturned penaltywww.premierleague.com