I can only imagine the emotions felt by the Scotland players when their dreams of qualification for the knockout rounds died on Wednesday night as Florencia Bonsegundo’s twice-taken penalty hit the back of the net, deep into stoppage time, and denied them victory over Argentina. For them, it must have been absolutely heartbreaking. Watching the drama unfold from a distance, I was feeling something quite different: fury.

I don’t think I have ever been as incensed by a football rule in my life. I was a fan of VAR at last year’s World Cup: coming in at the right time, cleaning up refereeing errors and making the game more objective. But using it to interpret the new changes to the law covering penalties is ridiculous.

VAR was intended to overrule clear and obvious mistakes, not to penalise goalkeepers for being inches off their line. Watching what looks like a bad experiment cheapen the Women’s World Cup feels wrong, and speaks to the fact we’re still not there in terms of equality. The last women’s World Cup was played on artificial turf, another first that was incredibly unpopular with players and coaches. I don’t believe a rule such as this would have been introduced so close to the men’s tournament, and to wheel it out in a competition that stands as the pinnacle of the women’s game is unfair.

Scotland crash out of Women’s World Cup after dramatic Argentina comeback Read more

The Scotland goalkeeper, Lee Alexander, clearly had not been properly prepared. As she faced the second penalty, having been punished the first time for taking the smallest forward step, she couldn’t even dive properly. At that point the law was crippling and the penalty taker may as well have had a free shot.

Forward movement is part of a goalkeeper’s technique for pushing themselves off into a save and, suddenly unable to stray even an inch off her line, she had no idea what to do. You may be questioning why, as a striker, I care so much about the goalkeeper when ultimately it makes it easier for my fellow strikers to score. I am aware this is the letter of the law, but I like to see a law that improves the game, brings competitive balance and fairness.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Lee Alexander, Scotland’s goalkeeper, saved a penalty before the referee forced a retake. Photograph: Daniela Porcelli/Getty Images

Players are being put in a position where they are forced to invent a new technique in the 93rd minute of a vital match at the World Cup finals. The fact the Premier League has already announced VAR will not be used to monitor goalkeepers’ positioning at penalties next season is hugely telling.

Who was consulted before the decision to interpret the law so rigidly was taken? Were any football teams involved? Were goalkeepers part of it? It seems to me that people have made up this rule without any idea of how it was actually going to affect a player’s movement.

At least Alexander had saved the first penalty. In the game between France and Nigeria on Monday night, Wendie Renard put her penalty wide before being given a second chance because Chiamaka Nnadozie had moved slightly off her line. At the second attempt, she scored the only goal of another important group game and left Nigeria’s hopes hanging by a thread.

Wendie Renard’s twice-taken penalty pushes France past Nigeria Read more

As the rule is being applied, a player could take the worst penalty in history, send it flying into the upper tier or spinning towards the corner flag, and still get another go. If the goalkeeper was three inches off her line in those circumstances, it couldn’t be less relevant.

These decisions are an absolute farce. I can understand that officials want to address the issue of goalkeepers coming way off their line before a penalty, but the rule has to be applied with some intelligence. The VAR can see exactly how much a goalkeeper has moved, and could surely give them a few centimetres’ leeway – the technology was brought in to correct obvious mistakes, not to impose perfection. The knockout stage starts on Saturday, bringing the possibility of penalty shootouts. My worry is this may get truly out of hand as the competition is reaching its most important, and most publicly scrutinised phase, and bring the women’s game into serious disrepute. Millions of people are watching these games, people who probably don’t watch a lot of women’s football, and thanks to VAR at times it is looking like a total joke.

In total seven minutes passed on Wednesday between the penalty being awarded and it finally going in, and the second half featured five goals and five substitutions. Yet the referee played only five minutes’ stoppage time, leaving both teams incensed at being denied a few more moments in which to find a winner that could have kept their tournament alive. The way the game ended was embarrassing, but as angry as Scotland’s players must have felt, they will know that having led 3-0 as late as the 74th minute against weaker opposition they would still be in the tournament were it not for naivety and poor decision-making.

Shelley Kerr has got her tactics wrong: they were too conservative in their first two games and played Kim Little too deep. On Wednesday they pushed her further up, and as a result she got the first goal.

England secured a third victory but there is plenty still to work on. Across all three matches they have let teams in the game – Japan were the only team they beat by more than a goal, and even then the second did not come until the 84th minute.

In the knockouts they need to be more ruthless and clinical. Defensively they continue to look a bit shaky when pressed.

Japan controlled possession impressively, particularly in the second half, but they don’t have much of a cutting edge up front, or from midfield. If they can develop that incision they will go back to being one of the best. They are very strong at youth level, and may come to the fore in the next major women’s tournament, next year’s Olympics in Tokyo. I suspect the penalty law may have been tweaked again by then.

• Comments on this piece are premoderated to ensure discussion remains on topics raised by the writer. Please be aware there may be a short delay in comments appearing on the site.