What they are saying is just a repeat of what the ref announced last night---there was contact with the ball first and contact with the head after that is acceptable so long as not excessive. I agree that contact was not excessive.
Of course, that is not the sequence that actually happened (there's some pretty clear pictures out there showing head contact prior to ball contact) but I get their problem that it looks really sketchy to do the full review last night and, with zero new data today, say anything different.
Of course, that is not the sequence that actually happened (there's some pretty clear pictures out there showing head contact prior to ball contact) but I get their problem that it looks really sketchy to do the full review last night and, with zero new data today, say anything different.