Also, it's worth people understanding how VAR actually works. The assistant referees describe what they are seeing in the video, and the referee hears this description. The referee then can say: no, I saw that and I don't think it was ...(whatever), or I didn't see that, and that could be an issue - the referee on the pitch decides what to review, with the help of theirassistant. Here, the Video Assistant Referee would have described that the ball struck Perisic's hand in a manner that could lead to a penalty. The referee could say: 'I saw that it hit his hand, but I don't think it was a penalty' and not go to to review it, since in his mind it wasn't clear and obvious. However, the referee could also say (and in this case probably did say) 'I didn't realise it struck his hand, I will have a check'. This, no matter the outcome, is a clear and obvious error - he didn't see that it hit his hand. He checks the video footage, and at this point he can decide whether or not it was a penalty - again, perhaps being guided or helped by the VAR. Here, he decides it was. This was Pitana's decision, not the VAR's. There have been occasions in both serie a and this world cup where a referee has gone to look at the footage and kept his on-field decision. In the end, the final decision is at the referee's discretion. It is help for the referees rather than instruction.