“Respecting the work and commitment of the refereeing class, we continue to record with growing bitterness a series of errors Always to our disadvantagerepeated and difficult to comprehend“This note contains all the anger of Lazio after the league draw at home toUdinese (1-1), with the Friulian goal scored by Davis in the last minute of injury time between protests of the Biancocelesti for an alleged touch with the attacker’s arm. A dubious episode, difficult to interpret, which also divided experts and former referees. Luca Marellivoice of Dazndefended the thesis of annulment. Opposite opinion from Gianpaolo Calvarese: in his opinion it was right to validate the goal.
Let’s start again from the match. Al Bluenergy stadium ends 1-1 after one balanced game which ignites in the final with the advantage of the guests Neighbor in the 80th minute and the Friulian draw in the last minute of recovery. Davis with a big sinister overcomes Provedelbut the Biancocelesti protest: at the start of the action there was a touch from the hand Palmaclearly involuntary. Most importantly, the ball came to Davis after a shot intercepted with his arm involuntarily by the Friulian attacker himself.
There is no doubt about the first touch: involuntary and not punishable. On the second, however, the riots broke out controversy. Lazio “asks for respect, uniformity of judgment and greater attention”, we read in the note, which speaks of “episodes that are clearly impacting the work of the team and thefairness of competitiongenerating relevant economic damage to the club and profoundly damaging the passion, commitment and sacrifices of a fan base”.
But the episode has caused discussion and there is nounambiguous interpretation. The starting point is always Rule 12 of the regulation, the one relating to handballs. The key concept is that ofimmediacy: a touch is punishable even if involuntary when the goal is scored immediately afterwards. Indeed, within “a certain amount of time”. Second Luca Marelliwhich cites in particular the precedent of a goal disallowed for Darmian of Inter in 2024, the goal should have been disallowed. “The concept of immediacy – he explains – in my opinion must be interpreted as ‘continuation of the action of the attacker who never takes possession of the ball.’” And Davis controls the ball “in the same field area after casual forearm contact.”
Another former referee, Gianpaolo Calvareseinterprets the episode in the opposite way: “The two situations they are not immediately successive: for this reason the goal is validated”. Calvarese underlines a crucial aspect: “The attacker does not score directly after the touch, but before discard two opponents and they pass 9 seconds“.
