Speaking after the game, right-back Matt Doherty added: “I thought because he went backwards and hit a defender it was a different phase of the game. I’ll have to look at the rule book. Some of us have no idea of what happened.”
Conte was unequivocal in his belief that the goal should have stood, with the Italian claiming Kane was behind the ball and could not have been in an offside position.
“I think the ball was in front of Kane and the goal is a goal,” Conte said. “I don’t understand the line they put [on the screen]. It is very difficult to comment on this decision. Var is doing a lot of damage. I want to see if in another stadium of a great team he is willing to cancel this type of goals. I wish I knew that.”
Was it the right decision?
The direction of the ball is not referred to in the offside laws of the International Football Association Board, which determine the rules of the game. What it does state is that a player can be brought into play if an opponent deliberately touches the ball, so it was the Var’s job to decide whether Nazinho intentionally made contact with Royal’s head.
Law 11 states: “A player in an offside position at the time the ball is played or touched by a teammate is penalized only for participating in active play to … gain an advantage by playing the ball or interfere with an opponent when it has bounced or been deflected off the post, the crossbar, the match official or an opponent.
“A player in an offside position who receives the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays it, including with deliberate handball, is not considered to have gained an advantage.”
So as soon as Van Boekel decided that Naziinho had deliberately not played the ball, Kane’s position became offside and the goal was controversial but correctly scored.
What could happen to Conte?
Antonio Conte could face up to two games from the touchline on Wednesday night for his red card against Sporting Lisbon, according to UEFA’s disciplinary rules.
UEFA regulation Article 15 specifies a two-match suspension for players or referees for “insulting or directing abusive language at a match official”. It remains to be seen whether Uefa will act on Conte’s questioning of the honesty of Dutch referee Danny Makkelie and his refereeing team. “I don’t see honesty in this type of situation [this game]”, Conte said after the match. “When I don’t see that, I feel very, very upset.”
Football Association regulations state that a player or coach can be charged for questioning the referee’s integrity under rule E3 if they are found to “implicate bias, attack the referees’ integrity”. Any Uefa charge of this nature would take the lead from Makkelie’s report to the governing body.