Borussia Dortmund left baffled by Chelsea's controversial penalty retake in UEFA Champions League

As Chelsea‘scoach, Graham Potterwanted to make a strong first impression in order to convince new owner Todd Boehly and the club’s hierarchy that they had chosen the proper person to guide the team toward its long-term goals. In Tuesday’s game at Stamford Bridge, he finally prevailed.

Despite being behind 1-0 going into the second leg against Borussia Dortmund,the Blues overcame the deficit by scoring once in the first half and again just after halftime.The odds looked to be stacked against the Germans.Two of their main stars and starters, Gregor Kobel and Karim Adeyemihad suffered injuriesthat forced them to miss the second leg.

As if that wasn’t enough,the kickoff was delayed by 10 minutes due to traffic congestion on the day of the match. Although Dortmund did their best to salvage a tie, they were ultimately eliminated since they were unable to convert any of their several high-quality scoring opportunities.

Why did Kai Havertz retake penalty against Borussia Dortmund?

Potter’s players have found it difficult to score goals this season, but they showed a more ruthless side in Europe’s biggest tournament, winning 2-1 on aggregate. The score was at 1-1 when the ball hit Dortmund’s Marius Wolf’s arm and resulted in a penalty for Chelsea.

Penalty kick taker Kai Havertz missed the target as the goalie dove the wrong way. With the use of the video assistant referee, it was determined that the Dortmund player had bounced off the post had entered the penalty area, and the referee subsequently ordered a retake of the penalty. Several Chelsea players had left the game too soon, but it didn’t change anything.

Borussia Dortmund were perplexed by the decision to give Chelsea another penalty, and they voiced their displeasure on social media. The response from the Black and Yellows on Twitter was a simple “???”

Nonetheless, it seems that there is a rationale for why VAR benefited Chelsea. As per Dale Johnson of ESPN,Enzo Fernandez, who is stationed on the outside of the area, is not obstructing the player’s view of the ball. In the age of video review, a defender’s incursion into the penalty area serves no purpose. It’s an attacking player’s ball if no defense touches it and the attacker plays it. Every infringement by a defender will result in a retake if there is an infraction.