Ex-referee Mateu Lahoz criticizes VAR decisions and inconsistencies in the first half of Barcelona-Valencia clash | OneFootball

Barcelona showcased their dominance in the first half against Valencia, scoring five goals in an impressive display. However, the opening 45 minutes were marked by two controversial incidents, which former international referee Mateu Lahoz analyzed on Tiempo de Juego.

The first contentious moment came when Valencia players appealed for a penalty after Casadó’s challenge on Almeida. Later, a penalty awarded against Szczęsny for a foul on Hugo Duro was overturned after referee Soto Grado, advised by VAR official Del Cerro Grande, reviewed an earlier foul by Gayá on Koundé.

Mateu Lahoz criticized the inconsistency in penalty decisions, arguing that if the earlier incident in Valencia’s favour wasn’t deemed a penalty, the same standard should apply consistently.

Lahoz said: “The incredible thing is that if you have decided that in the play we have seen it was not a penalty for Valencia, even if there is doubt, in the other one you don’t hesitate so much, you concede a penalty straight away. That’s the reading of the competition. It’s the same thing that happened in the Barcelona area and it would be a penalty to Almeida..”

Lahoz also expressed frustration with the prolonged VAR reviews. “We’ve said this repeatedly—this is not football. You can’t spend more than a minute reviewing the monitor. It should only be used for clear-cut decisions,”

Lahoz also criticized the 24-second wait it took to rule out Valencia’s penalty, pointing out a similar 37-second review in a previous Real Sociedad-Girona match.

These moments highlighted the ongoing debate surrounding VAR and its impact on the flow of the game.

GSFN | Ciaran Currie