It was one of the greatest nights in Manchester United's history, but it was also one of the most controversial as VAR helped them to a famous victory over PSG, but should Marcus Rashford's penalty have been given?
Rashford kept his nerve superbly to rifle home a stoppage-time penalty that saw United erase a two-goal first-leg deficit and reach the quarter-finals of the Champions League at Paris St Germain's expense.
But opinion is raging over the decision to award the spot-kick for handball against PSG defender Presnel Kimpembe, with players and even current and former officials split over the verdict.
Some say the handball law needs changing, some say that VAR should not have even been involved in what is still a subjective matter - let's look at the big talking points...
The incident
United had defended doggedly all game but PSG had also missed a host of great chances themselves, while gifting the visitors two goals with two sloppy defensive errors. Even just before the penalty, PSG struck a post after Kylian Mbappe had messed up a one-on-one when clean through.
Then, with time running out, Diago Dalot's hopeful strike was deflected wide by Kimpembe for a corner. Dalot himself seemed to be the only one in the stadium who appealed for handball, but sadly for PSG the VAR officials agreed and signalled to the on-field referee to take a look on replay - and the rest is history!
Was it a penalty?
It depends who you ask. Most players seem adamant it should not have been awarded - even former United star Rio Ferdinand insisted it had been impossible for Kimpembe to get out of the way. Even top referees are split on the issue. Former Premier League official Peter Walton said he had no doubt that under the letter of the current law, the right decision had been applied. But both Mark Clattenburg and Dermot Gallagher have said it was wrong.
Why the confusion?
Most of the analysis of the incident seems to centre around whether Kimpembe's action was deliberate. Whilst common consensus suggests that it wasn't, there also appears to be confusion over whether, as the ball clearly struck his arm, the question of actual intent is irrelevant. Coincidentally, it is precisely the issue that the International Football Association Board (IFAB) had been attempting to clear up at its annual general meeting last week.
What is IFAB, and what did it decide?
IFAB is an independent body made up of experts who set the laws of the game. At their AGM on Saturday it specifically questioned the use of the word "deliberate" in terms of handball decisions, arguing instead that the focus should be on whether or not the player's arm extended beyond a "natural silhouette" when it came into contact with the ball. For example, if a player kept his hands by his sides, a handball would not be given. How that might be interpreted in the case of a player who, like Kimpembe, is levering his arms in the course of a jump, is still not clear.
What did VAR have to do with it all?
Use of VAR in Champions League games only came into play in this season's last 16 and had been under the microscope since the system briefly malfunctioned during Manchester City's game at Schalke last month, in a time period in which two penalties were awarded. Referee Skomina referred to VAR to watch multiple replays of Kimpembe blocking Diogo Dalot's shot before awarding the penalty, and it was hard to see how not penalising Kimpembe for a handball could be construed as a "clear and obvious" error by the referee, which is supposed to be when VAR comes into play.
Have your say...
Fast Results
Scores
