No, it should NOT work like that. Then it says that the referee would have rated it that way and there is no clear wrong decision. The referee should whistle what he sees – except for offside, where you can let play continue.
Such a rash is actually always punished at the moment – usually there is also yellow (or yellow-red, as we Hanseatics know to report)
Well, first of all, it may very well go like this. It wasn’t really a banging out, what you’re doing it for here. So recognizing a crystal-clear foul with a good view of the situation takes a lot of imagination with Jablonsky. That’s the only thing he can whistle at all.
And the crux of the matter is that Jablonski doesn’t even whistle at the supposed/alleged foul, but only when Afolayan gets a shot on goal.
That means: either he whistles immediately and doesn’t even let the chance arise.
Or he waits for the chance and can then get the hint: There could have been a foul, look at it.
But as it is, it’s just very badly done and has a very, very insipid aftertaste that he didn’t call the foul, but called the goal back just in time. An aftertaste that is still supported by the numerous questionable duel interpretations.
I stand by it: we couldn’t win against Jablonsky today. But you lost through stupidity and arrogance in individual moments in defensive behavior. I’m happy when Paqarada is in Cologne.