Harry Kane's Denied Penalty Sparks Debate as England Secure 2-1 Victory Over DR Congo
Auf einen Blick
- England captain Harry Kane was denied a penalty against DR Congo despite clear contact, a decision upheld by VAR.
- Despite trailing 1-0 at half-time, Kane scored two late goals to secure a 2-1 victory, booking England's place in the last-16 against Mexico.
- The controversial penalty call divided pundits.
KI-generierte Zusammenfassung
Warum es wichtig ist
England faced DR Congo in a last-32 tie, where Harry Kane's penalty appeal was controversially denied by the referee and VAR, leaving England a goal down at half-time. Kane later scored two goals to secure a 2-1 victory.
As Harry Kane fell in the box, it looked like England were about to have the perfect opportunity to draw level against DR Congo late in the first half of their last-32 tie.
The Three Lions captain was played through on goal, knocked the ball past on-rushing goalkeeper Lionel Mpasi and ended up sprawled on the ground.
There was certainly contact and Kane was adamant he should have had a penalty, but referee Adham Makhadmeh waved away England's appeals.
The Jordanian official gestured the striker had dived, but did not show him a yellow card for the offence.
After a check from the video assistant referee (VAR), the on-field decision was upheld and England remained a goal behind at half-time, following a seventh-minute strike from Brian Cipenga.
Kane, though, struck twice in the final 15 minutes to give his side a battling 2-1 victory and book a last-16 meeting with Mexico on Monday, 6 July.
"This is so difficult," former Premier League assistant referee Darren Cann told BBC One.
"There are four of us here, two think it's a penalty, two think it's not a penalty and therefore it's not clear and obvious in terms of VAR.
"From live play it looks a penalty, a small touch on Harry Kane's ankle from the goalkeeper and he would be expecting to give away a penalty.
"From the referee's angle, Kane puts his two feet together, he stumbles and it doesn't look as much of a penalty. There-in lies the difference. For me, I think it's a penalty.
"The referee's decision would stand if he had given a penalty, the VAR would not have intervened."
As Cann mentioned, the pundits in the BBC TV studio were split on whether a spot-kick should have been awarded with former England striker Wayne Rooney not convinced Kane was fouled.
"I'm all for the forwards, but I think Harry Kane trips himself a bit and jumps into the goalkeeper a little bit," he said.
"I think it looks like he has dived into him, so it probably isn't a penalty."
However, the ex-Manchester United man was in the minority.
"If it's on my water bottle, I am working out where Kane's next penalty is going to be," former England keeper Joe Hart told BBC One.
"Mpasi will be delighted to when he looks up and sees the referee not giving it, because I would expect that to be given against me."
Former Manchester City defender Micah Richards added: "I just think Lionel Mpasi touches Harry Kane, so I want that as a penalty."
The pundits on BBC Radio 5 Live believe Kane did create the contact but were in agreement it was a foul by Mpasi.
"Definite penalty," added former Lionesses captain Steph Houghton. "I think even though Kane has initiated the contact, where else is he supposed to go when Mpasi comes out that quick?
"I'm so shocked the VAR didn't overturn the decision to be honest."
Ex-goalkeeper Paul Robinson, who played for England at the 2006 World Cup, said: "If England are to lose then there will be a question asked for a long time because it's a stonewall penalty.
"Harry Kane initiates the contact but the contact is there. He's very clever, very experienced and he goes into the goalkeeper."
Offene Fragen
- What was the precise VAR justification for upholding the decision?
