Chelsea profits! "Timeout" goal + the opponent s good goal was blown away 1-0 and turned 0-1, and the famous coach angrily criticized the referee

On August 30, a focus match in the third round of the Premier League began, with Chelsea playing against Fulham at home. In the first half of the game, two controversial penalty changed the situation of the game, and Chelsea became the beneficiary, from falling behind 0-1 to leading 1-0. In the 21st minute, Fulham, who was visiting, almost took the lead. They made a quick counterattack after stealing in the backcourt, Munis Marseille swerved and sent a straight pass. After getting the ball, Josh King seized the excellent single-shot opportunity, broke into the penalty area and calmly dunked through the defense and shot into the net.

However, just as the Fulham player celebrated excitedly, VAR intervened to indicate that Munis had suspected a foul when he intercepted. After watching the replay in person, the referee determined that Munis's trampling foul was invalid when the goal was scored. However, the playback shows that Munisla's ball-proofing move was judged to be fouled, which is too forced.

BBC reporter Nizaar Kinsella angrily criticized referee Robert Jones's penalty. He said: "This is definitely a very controversial penalty!"

"It is obviously a reasonable center guard, and football is a sport of physical contact. The referee is simply punishing the forward who has completed his job. Munis just showed his perfect fulcrum center skills."

This is not over. Before the half, Chelsea scored a buzzer-beater. But the stoppage time of the first half was 8 minutes, and Chelsea's corner kick scored for 54 minutes, "timeout" for 1 minute. The referee can blow the whistle at the end of the half before the first corner kick ends.

It is no wonder that Fulham coach Marco Silva pointed at the fourth official in the game from a close distance after Chelsea scored, and complained angrily, expressing his strong dissatisfaction. If Fulham loses due to two controversial penaltys, it is indeed unconvincing.