Deniz Undav made no attempt to conceal his frustration after Stuttgart’s Europa League win over Celtic, despite his side advancing 4-2 on aggregate. A second-half goal was chalked off following a VAR review, and Undav was still seething about it when he spoke to the media after the final whistle.
On the night, Celtic won the match 1-0 in Stuttgart. Luke McCowan’s early goal gave the Hoops a foothold, but Stuttgart remained largely in control throughout, creating enough chances to feel comfortable about their progress over the tie. Undav believed he had drawn the teams level on the night when he converted from close range, only to see the goal disallowed.
The decision came down to the build-up play. A Stuttgart player had returned to the field of play before the move had developed, and VAR ruled the entire phase invalid as a result. Martin O’Neill had been animated on the touchline during the incident, and afterwards he was clear in his assessment, stating that a player had run back onto the pitch without permission and had directly influenced what followed, giving his side an advantage they were not entitled to.
Undav took a very different view. Speaking to Sky Austria, he said the most important thing was that Stuttgart had gone through, but made clear he was not happy. He directed his anger not at the specific decision but at VAR as a concept, arguing that it now produces more errors than the referees it is supposed to support. He was particularly pointed in his remarks about the VAR officials, suggesting they appear to be watching the game without paying attention, and concluded that the whole system has become a source of nonsense rather than clarity.
The contrast in their perspectives was striking. O’Neill was focused entirely on the sequence of events and the basic rule that had been broken. Undav was venting at the broader operation of video review. One was challenging the legitimacy of how the move began. The other was questioning whether VAR should be intervening at all.
Stuttgart did enough across both legs to deserve their place in the next round. But on that particular moment, the case for the disallowance rests more on how the phase started than on how it ended.