View attachment 49243View attachment 49244
Once you discount the DGSO then it is the same situation wherever they are on the pitch.
As the images show. The ball travels from the point of impact, 6ft above their heads on the 16 yard line to bouncing at around the 8/9 yard mark in about 0.25 of a second. Mount is not Usain Bolt with rocket boosters. He had no chance of getting the ball. It was in no way a clear opportunity. They got this decision spot on.
VAR did its job perfectly. The referee missed it, VAR picked it up and awarded the correct punishments (penalty and yellow card).
Hard to tell from one frame where the ball is behind them, and one frame where it's two yards in front and Mount is already fully on the deck. The ball in the second frame looks like it's bounced too.
See, from that I see that halfway between frame 1 and frame 2 (which should be a lot of frames), the ball is head height (the position in between the floor and 6 foot above Mount), and at that time Mount would have been near the penalty spot (stood) up, not sprinting (as he wasn't sprinting), ie he could/ would have got the ball, and any touch is an opportunity there. Players can cover 10 yards in a second, there he only had to go 3-5 or so (hence why he wasn't sprinting).
The fact mount was looking back at the ball (for the whooel time) suggests he could have got it too, and he knows more than anyone, unless they ran it through a model. When players have less chance of getting the ball they face the goal, and try and look up at the last second, as that's their only chance (and those are the hardest chances).
Here's the frame where the ball hits the deck, I can't find a video with the side on youtube (where I can do frame by frame). The ball only looks a couple of yards away, and Mount had been pushed to the side too, when he was running in a straight line from the edge of the box to the goal.
The more I look at it though, the more and more I wonder what the hell the defender was doing, other than taking a red card for the team as he knew mount was getting there, and he couldn't himself.
Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.
The following must be considered:
• distance between the offence and the goal - 8 yards 
• general direction of the play -
Middle of the goal
• likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball - Pretty high if he wasn't fouled, only needed a touch or a header and it could have been a goal
• location and number of defenders - Keeper wasn't close, the defender was the last man
So, the above rules, prove the ref in the studio didn't know the actual rules, as being in possession means zero, if you could have got possession.
Hernandez was booked, so by booking him the ref is claiming he was going for the ball (which he wasn't, as he never looked at the ball). Then pushing is also listed as one of the other circumstances where a yellow would not apply, so it has to be a red.
The only doubt would be if there was going to be an obvious opportunity, and there was, if he wasn't fouled. Why would the player foul him if he wasn't worried it was an opportunity? If there was a lesser opportunity mount wouldn't have been looking at the ball the entire time, he knew he was going to get something on it, and anything is a chance 8 yards out in the middle of the goal.
