Penalty denied to Atalanta against Juve, Marelli: "VAR could not help but intervene"

The episode under discussion in Juventus-Atalanta came in the first half, when the Bianconeri were already 1-0 ahead. Jonathan Rowe takes the time of Pierre Kalulu on a ball directed towards the center of the area, the Bianconeri defender grabs the opponent's shirt. The pull is long and obvious, Rowe, letting go, ends up on the ground, but referee Zufferli allows the game to continue. Even VAR does not intervene.

A decision contested by Atalanta and for which, after the match, Luca Marelli expressed a very clear position during the refereeing analysis on DAZN: according to the former referee, that tackle on Rowe was a penalty.

Why Kalulu's pull on Rowe was a penalty

The footage shows Kalulu already being passed by the Atalanta striker after the filtering pass. The Juventus defender realises that he will not be able to catch the ball anymore and pulls Rowe's shirt, which is visibly stretched for a few moments. "The shirt is clearly stretched for a long time and the pull is very, very visible," explains Marelli.

The former referee then distinguishes this episode from the normal physical struggle that can occur, for example, during the development of a corner kick: in this case there is no mutual pull. It is only Kalulu, now late, who grabs onto his opponent. And it is precisely this element that makes the reference to the so-called “high threshold” of contacts, dictated by the new line established by the referees’ chief Orsato, insufficient: “It is okay to let something more pass, but you cannot go beyond the regulations”.

Marelli explains why VAR should have called the referee

The most delicate point, however, is related to the non-intervention of the one who could see the episode on the monitor. The referee may not have noticed the withdrawal, because he was covered by the players who were in front of the action. According to the motionist Marelli, however, the footage available to the VAR room made the error clear: “VAR could not not intervene in such a circumstance. In my opinion, this is a clear penalty that is missing,” concluded the DAZN refereeing analyst.

There would be no red card.

Then there is the issue of disciplinary action. If the penalty had been awarded, Kalulu would not have been sent off, because one of the necessary elements to consider the case as DOGSO is missing: the certainty that Rowe would be able to take control of the ball. The withdrawal, being without any attempt to play the ball, could only lead to a red card in the presence of a clear case of denied goal. In this case, according to the analysis of the motionist Marelli, the correct punishment would be a penalty and a yellow card.