Roma criticises United’s penalty and the failure to suspend Maguire
Yesterday's one was not a happy evening for Jesús Gil Manzano, nor for Roma who suffered the refereeing in the match against Manchester United. The Spanish official goes into a short circuit in the second half, with two decisions that heavily affect the game: the very generous penalty awarded to the English for a contact between Mancini and Cunha and the failure to send off Harry Maguire. And even the disciplinary meter left much to be desired.
The penalty in favour of Roma
The first highlight of the evening arrives at the 16th minute, when Gil Manzano correctly awards a penalty to Roma for Heaven's handball on Soulé's shot. The English defender's arm is outstretched and increases the body volume: a correct decision.
Penalty for United and Maguire
A very different judgment on the penalty awarded to Manchester United at the 55th minute. Cunha goes to ground after a contact with Mancini, but the Brazilian striker loses his balance already before the light challenge from the yellow‑red defender, a contact insufficient to justify the maximum punishment. A penalty, which Gil Manzano awards immediately and without any VAR intervention.
The subsequent repeat of the penalty, initially saved by Vásquez from Bruno Fernandes, is correct although very harsh, due to the early entry into the area by Bryan Cristante, who then intervenes on the ball deflected by the goalkeeper. It is not the simple intrusion that determines the foul, but the active participation of the Roma midfielder in the action following the save.
The other serious error concerns Harry Maguire. The English defender is first cautioned for an arm challenge on Castro, who is hit in the face. A few minutes later, however, he is again involved in a clash, still with the Roma attacker, held and impeded with the leg while the Englishman is on the ground.
A reaction that would have deserved a second caution. Gil Manzano instead spares the red card for Maguire, which would have left United at a numerical disadvantage before the decisive goal.
No VAR responsibility in this case: the protocol does not allow intervention for cautions. The novelty introduced this season regarding second cautions concerns only the possibility of removing a clearly erroneous one, not of adding a missed one.
For the record, the contact between Wesley and Lacey in the yellow‑red area also raises some doubt: the penalty in favour of United would certainly have been less generous than the one actually awarded. Finally, the sending‑off of Cunha in stoppage time was correct, for a double caution.