![Pinterest](https://pinterest.com/pin/create/button/?url=https://uknews.evprotec.com/mark-halsey-harry-kanes-goal-should-not-have-been-disallowed/&media=https://uknews.evprotec.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/crop-20236732.jpg&description=DUTCH VAR Pol van Boekel's controversial decision to rule out Harry Kane's late would-be winner for offside was very, very tight. The fact the ball deflected off Sporting defender Flavio Nazinho before it reached Tottenham's Kane is irrelevant because it was not a deliberate play. Kane thought he had snatched a late winnerCredit: Getty Images - Getty But VAR deemed him to be offside, chalking the goal offCredit: Getty Secondly, the fact the ball went backwards off Emerson Royal's head before it reached Kane does not matter either, the direction of the ball never does. It is whether Kane was closer to the goal line than the ball and the second-most rear defender when it was played. If Kane was judged to have been behind the ball, he would have been onside. Technology isn't foolproof and can we say Kane was definitely in front of the ball when Royal headed it? I'm not sure. It took around four minutes to check and if it is taking that long we shouldn't be disallowing goals like that. It was very difficult to tell if Kane was a toenail in front or behind the ball. If that's what the VAR is looking for and it takes four minutes, you can find whatever you want to find. What Antonio Conte said Boss Antonio Conte was fuming with the decision and even received his marching orders. FREE BETS AND SIGN UP DEALS - BEST NEW CUSTOMER OFFERS The Italian hit out at VAR, saying it is "doing a lot of damage". Conte told BT Sport: "I think the ball was in front of Kane and the goal is a goal. Yeah. I don't understand the line they put. It very difficult to comment on this decision. "VAR is doing a lot of damage. I want to see if in another stadium of a big team if they are ready to disallow this type of goal. I'd like to know this. "A lot of injustice. I don't like this type of situation. I see not positive things. "The second half was positive and we played with a great intensity. We deserved to win but we know what happened. "I don't understand why we have to get something from the){kind=link}
DUTCH VAR Pol van Boekel’s controversial decision to rule out Harry Kane’s late would-be winner for offside was very, very tight.
The fact the ball deflected off Sporting defender Flavio Nazinho before it reached Tottenham’s Kane is irrelevant because it was not a deliberate play.
Secondly, the fact the ball went backwards off Emerson Royal’s head before it reached Kane does not matter either, the direction of the ball never does.
It is whether Kane was closer to the goal line than the ball and the second-most rear defender when it was played.
If Kane was judged to have been behind the ball, he would have been onside.