Rafael Leao and Zachary Athekame found the back of the net for AC Milan in their 2-2 draw against Pisa, but both goals have since been questioned for potential offside.
Milan had hoped for a strong performance, as well as a good result, in their game against Pisa last night. In the end, however, they got none of those as the away side came away with a point while the performance left a lot to be desired.
Read SempreMilan ad-free and get access to exclusive news. Click here for a free trial!
On top of that, there has been a lot of officiating controversy in the post-match comments as Milan believe the second goal should’ve been disallowed for a clear foul on Matteo Gabbia. Pisa, meanwhile, have highlighted the flaws of the offside rule.
For both of Milan’s goals, questions have been asked about whether the players in front of the goalkeeper (all in an offside position) affected the play. On Leao’s goal, it was Strahinja Pavlovic who made it difficult for the goalkeeper, while it was mainly Youssouf Fofana for Athekame’s strike.
However, as explained by the expert Denis of Errori Arbitrali, the new interpretation of the offside rule that was brought into use last year means both goals were correct:
“Why, in this situation, the attacker can be deemed ‘non-impactful’, comes from a directive issued by the technical sector last year: 1) the shot comes from outside the penalty area and 2) the attacker in an offside position is far from the goalkeeper.
“Under these conditions, it is assumed that the goalkeeper still has the time to make the save,” he explained when talking about Leao’s goal.
#MilanPisa | sul goal del vantaggio di #Leao, sembra (uso sembra perché il fermo immagine l’ho fatto io non c’è quello ufficiale) che #Pavlovic sia in posizione di fuorigioco.
Perché in questa situazione l’attaccante può essere giudicato “non impattante” ve lo avevo già… pic.twitter.com/COKzphdfQl
— Denis Errori Arbitrali (@erroriarbitrali) October 24, 2025
The same rules apply to Athekame’s strike, so the fact that Pavlovic and Fofana weren’t directly in the goalkeeper’s line of sight and also kept their distance got Milan off the hook.
Clear foul on Gabbia? LOL. Let’s not get carried away and act all Pioli about the referees. That collision didn’t effect the goal in any way.
Let’s not look at football that way. What if Santi decides to punch on of their defenders in the face while they’re attacking? Obviously that doesn’t impact the play but wouldn’t VAR call that out? It’s a question of whether it’s a foul or not, not whether it impacts play otherwise you’re allowed to do nasty things to your opponents cuz it doesn’t impact their play.
The replays I saw yesterday didn’t show any evidence of it being a foul but I did see one today that showed it was a foul.
But I still stand by my stand: No need to act all Pioli about it. It happens. We didn’t play well enough to get 3 points and only losers would point the finger at the refs or VAR.
This expert is a tool. Offside rule per AI states: Active involvement: “The player must interfere with play or an opponent to be penalized. This can include touching the ball, challenging an opponent, or making an obvious action that impacts the opponent.” Pavlovic made and attempt on the ball.
He did. I would have disallowed the goal if I were VAR or the ref.