what was improper about var usage in US game

The issue was that VAR appears to have been used in a way that did not match its own protocol, especially by leaning on slow-motion and still replays to judge the seriousness of the foul. Reported criticism says that can make a normal challenge look worse than it really was, which is why many observers thought the U.S. player’s red card was improper.

What was said to be wrong

• VAR reportedly recommended the on-field review based on replays that made the contact look more severe in slow motion.

• Critics argued that slow-motion should be used only to identify the point of contact, not to exaggerate force or intent.

• After the referee saw the monitor, a red card became more likely because the images presented were already framed as dangerous.

Why people disagreed

Some commentators said the foul was accidental and happened while both players were simply challenging for the ball, so it should not have been treated as serious foul play. Others focused less on the tackle itself and more on the process, saying the review system was applied inconsistently and that this raised concerns about the integrity of the game.

In plain English

The core complaint is: VAR may have turned a routine-looking football collision into a red-card offense by using the wrong kind of replay analysis. That is why the decision was widely described as improper rather than just unfortunate.

TL;DR: The controversy was not only about the tackle, but about VAR allegedly using slow-motion replays in a way that went beyond its proper rules.