Anonymous #1 1d

It applies all the time in other leagues without the sidelines technology. Point of VAR shouldn’t be to overturn on the field decisions unless it’s clear and obvious because then you’re just re-refereeing everything. The Croatian player initially barely grazing the ball and it not changing the path of the ball making the other guy offside is the awful call here

7

Anonymous OP 1d

It’s correct and it’s how it’s worked in all of the upper level leagues that use the semi automated offside technology. It’s unfortunate but you can’t criticize the referee for that. It’s the one aspect of officiating they have been painfully consistent on.

3

Anonymous #1 1d

But the issue with this call isn’t the guy being offside, it’s about whether the Croatian player who “heads” the ball even touched it and I don’t think there was clear and obvious evidence that showed he did touch it

5

Anonymous OP 1d

They have a sensor in the ball that says he did. You can agree or disagree with what it looked like but that’s what they are using to make the decision and that is no surprise to anyone. It’s unfortunate but that’s football in the modern era of VAR and You can’t blame the referee for giving an objectively correct decision based on how offside is currently being decided.

5

Anonymous #1 1d

Doesn’t make it not suck though.

3

Anonymous #1 1d

I’m not blaming the referee I’m blaming the over reliance on VAR. if upon video evidence we don’t even see the ball change paths that shouldn’t count as a touch on the ball, idc if a sensor goes off, it should be clear and obviously seen with your eyes to overturn the call on the field. What’s the point of having on the field refs atp if everything is being re-refereed anyways with the thinnest possible margins

1

Anonymous OP 1d

If we’re going by that definition, fine, you can’t say that ref is being non-biased tho. He was giving Croatia nothing all game. That pen was bs, you can’t argue otherwise. The dude was already falling down before he felt that guys hands on him

0

Anonymous #2 1d

Yeah I don’t agree with that either because VAR makes that call with slowed down replays that always make things look worse than they are. I’m just talking about that specific disallowed goal

1

Anonymous OP 1d

If they need to slow something down like that, it’s just looking for a reason to disallow it

1

Anonymous #2 1d

That’s what I mean by VAR now essentially re-officiating every play. Should only be used for clear and obvious errors

1

Anonymous #2 1d

I don’t agree. The ref did his best at being fair to both teams. And in my opinion the game should have been stopped already by the time the controversial goal happened.

1