When I first saw the replay i thought it wasn't but when you saw it from the different angle it definitely was. Shocking miss though in the end. Thought he slipped a bit just as he was coming to take it.
As we speak the ref just waved away Peru's claim, to be taken back and penalty given...
When I first saw the replay i thought it wasn't but when you saw it from the different angle it definitely was. Shocking miss though in the end. Thought he slipped a bit just as he was coming to take it.
Last edited by mikemiller; 16-06-2018 at 05:09 PM.
Well how many pens is that given this tournament already? Gary Linacre has said only one pen given all last world cup.I reckon this will end up the tournament with the most pens given ever by far. Could start to become farcical but the n again a pen is a pen maybe we have never given enough in the past. Is there gonna be vAR in the champ next season? Should be interesting if there is. It will also have repercussions because no defender will dare challenge in the box. Should mean more goals overall then. Not sure this will benefit the millers or not next season. I suppose tactics then would be is keep gatting the ball as much as you can into the box with strong fast runnets a bit wimbledonish. Will it spoil the beautiful game though?
I'm not sure I would fully agree millmoormagic.. I would sooner the ref have the technology available to him when he requests it. If he's happy with a clear foul then get on with it.. It's a distraction if the ref makes a decision and you have a jobsworth in your ear saying check this, check that.
In rugby the ref asks the var if there's any reason why I can't award a try. Or I'm awarding a try can you check for any reason I can't give it. If the ref gives a try the var man doesn't come on and say " wait a bit, we need to check that" the try is given..
Reviews in cricket and rugby work because they look at areas of fact rather than opinion (ok in cricket ball tracking on LBWs and snicko create a virtual fact).
But rugby asks was the ball grounded, is there a foot in touch, is it a forward pass, knock on, etc. In cricket - is it a run out/ stumping, does ball tracking show its hitting, does snicko show a spike.
With fouls in football you are asking a question of opinion. The rules of the game say a decision is in 'the opinion of the ref'. After every televised game during the post match analysis we see how opinions vary looking at the same footage - even with super slo mo magnified. VAR on fouls will create more questions than answers (but then this is what the majority of fans wanted).
There was a page on the BBC website last week reporting that the amount of fouls and diving has reduced in games where VAR is used so players are mindful they are much more likely to be caught for an offence or cheating.
Got to be a good thing.
As someone has said above, the wrestling matches that break out during corner kicks and free kicks into the box had now got to be stopped. To be fair pens have already been given in this World Cup for this offence.
The interpretation of a foul seems to be getting pretty blurred. We have commentators talking about "contact" in the penalty box when, as far as I'm aware, football is a contact sport.
Surely a foul has to be deliberate or with "intent" for a free kick to be awarded..
I didn't feel the penalty awarded to France demonstrated either of the above. VAR saw to an incorrect decision being made IMO.