then what with the yellow card for lucas around minute 30? it was clearly playing the ball against rebic. lucas might had gotten a second yellow later, that would have influenced the game massively. if you follow the build up towards griezmann's dive there is a scene, where mbappé is clearly blocked by strinic about 10 seconds before. so, where to draw the line?
Pause at 00:12 to 00:13 , Pogba CLEARLY elbows mandzukic's back from behind and force him to head the ball backwards thus making him score the own goal , why didn't VAR say anything ? by the way there was a much clearer angle replay that shows him do that but they didn't include it in the FIFA official goal video , hope someone here have a link to it.
In Croatia, there's more fuss about that free kick that led to the France lead, than the Perišić handball. I hope that VAR use is extended to allow review of free kicks that lead to a goal.
I think, by definition, dive is a strong word for this incident. It appeared to me like Griezmann's right foot lost traction and went out from under him, so he was on his way to ground anyway, then there was the contact. That being said, I would have liked to have seen Griezmann tell the referee there was really no clear foul. Especially since it resulted in a goal.
Amazing to me as well, that few people have noticed this. Utterly deliberate, and could be a caution. To be fair, Pitana is unsighted since it was in the player’s left. I think the AR should have had a decent view.
"The ball has travelled a very short distance" Apparently the distance from the corner arc to the goal area is "very short"?
Hmmmm....I seem to remember a poor header giving France the first goal. Perhaps, we watched different matches.
Our referee called it a GOAL KICK. He saw nothing on that play originally that was correct. If there is an AAR, it’s a penalty. The VAR takes the place here of the AAR. The defender batted the ball out of play preventing it from going towards the goal any further. It’s a penalty. Pitana had no idea the ball had even been touched by the defender let alone handled. And should I mention again how poor the defensive header was that led to the corner in the first place? Vida had a difficult match. His header was nearly 35 yards from the end line. If we are blaming officials for goals, let’s at least assign a LITTLE of the blame to the real guilty parties.
I have seldom seen so much made-up controversy over a couple of goals which hardly qualified for so much attention! True: the own goal that put France on top was against the run of play. Croatia was doing better than France and it seemed to some unfair that France would take the lead without having a shot on Croatia's goal. But whose fault is that? The foul that led to the free-kick that led to the own goal might have not be clearly a foul. Maybe the contact didn't cause Greizman's fall and he was going down anyway? Or maybe the trip/contact did contribute to the fall. Regardless, I guess if we wind the clock back far enough, there will always be something in the sequence leading up to a goal that someone can question. But that free-kick wasn't some bizarre and totally unjustified call that showed Pitana either incompetent or biased. After so many replays of the incident, there will be referees who couldn't care about France or Croatia who will still decide that foul differently. And there were a couple of degrees of separation between that free-kick and the goal. There was the free-kick, the own header, and the Croatian goalie not doing enough to save the goal. So, again, whose fault was that own goal that put France ahead against the run of play? . Again True: the handball penalty was unnecessary and so untimely. After Croatia had managed to score a nice goal to draw the game level, it was entirely unfortunate for Croatia to find itself trailing again. But whose fault was that? The handball was pretty clear but what Perisic was trying to do in that incident wasn't. I guess every handball penalty, short of what Suarez did against Ghana, can find someone to spin it to make it seem questionable. But this is one of those rare ones that despite not being necessary to stop a play from leading to a goal, might have actually been deliberate. Okay, I can't prove that. The factors listed to allow people to infer a handball being deliberate apply here, but I will admit those factors often make even handball that are clearly not deliberate be regarded as deliberate. I really don't know what Perisic was trying to do with his hands in this incident. And it really doesn't matter how many more times I see the incident. But what I know is that after watching a good bit of football over the years, that there was nothing bizarre or out of the ordinary for a referee to call that handball a penalty. So once again, whose fault was that there was a handball in Croatia's box that gave France the lead once again, even if they hadn't done much on the run of play to deserve such a lead? I think most of Croatia's fans know the answer, even if they try to deflect it to point the finger at Pitana.
This is pretty much my final take away from this WC. That dive/free kick changed the entire complexion of the match. FIFA is crowing that the end result means it would not have mattered. Ha! It changes everything from that point on! Though the handball call is equally bad.
Hmm soccer is an interesting sport. We had a former national referee coach who along with sandy hunt and a few others took the FIFA futuro courses and had an actual ability to coach FIFA modules. Nonetheless we asked these questions why the language sucks. Their response is that IFAB makes the law change and then they spend the next couple years tweaking the language so it translates to Spanish and German more fluid. Something to consider to is that the VAR protocols started out with the Dutch. So you have a Dutch person writing these protocols into English. I agree with you the language is murky tho. They'll have time to go back and clean up the language. I'm curious moving forward what this means for VAR.
Wow....that is some take. So, the first goal of the match changed the remaining 70+ minutes, and then the tying goal changed the remaining 60+ minutes and then the penalty changed the remaining 50+ minutes. I get it. Everything changes everything.
You're not thinking this out. So you're only doing the review AFTER the goal gets scored? But if it's not scored, we just keep playing? Complete nonsense! Refs screw up as do players and coaches. VAR isn't there to check every foul or re-referee the match.
Had that goal never happened, the rest of the half would have played out differently. I am not saying France would not have broken through eventually, but Croatia were dictating the pace in the first half. Especially going down under such a questionable call. Add the handball, and most sides would have a difficult time rebounding. You see it in every major sport, one bad call can cause a ripple effect. I am not even sure why you are arguing the point? It is less about the goal, and more about how it happened. Feeling done in by the ref's has wrecked many a teams spirit.
Wow. That is some hypothesis. I may have missed Croatia going down a goal after 5 minutes to England. I may have missed Croatia going down a goal to Russia and I may have missed Croatia going down a goal to Denmark. They won all of those matches. The two calls had NOTHING to do with the the SPIRIT of the team which you seem to think is quantifiable from the comfort of your viewing area. I harken back to the great Brian Clough who forbid his squads to complain about the refereeing. Here’s an article you should look at: https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...m-forest-anderlecht-match-fixing-scandal-1984 He just got on with it. And besides referees not losing football matches, tactics don’t either. PLAYERS lose football matches. Croatia played very well. They didn’t win. That happens. The referee had NOTHING to do with the result.
Ok bud, there is no convincing you. Seems like you have an opinion, just like I do. Croatia was controlling the match. I think France would have worn them down regardless, but the nature of those two goals moved it from a contest that was in doubt, and I believe would have remained so until the very end, to a rather one sided contest. I had a rather lengthy rebuttal, but there is no point. My point was that FIFA WAS CROWING ABOUT IT ENDING AS A LOPSIDED AFFAIR, as if that proved the final outcome was never in doubt, and removing the controversy about those two calls.
Did you miss France scoring two goals in 6 minutes of the second half of a one goal game? Did the referee have any involvement in those two goals? I’m pretty confident in saying the back line of Croatia had a tough afternoon. Would’t you agree? Did you read the article I sent you? Blaming referees for the outcome of a match is crap. Absolute crap. I have heard coaches do it in the post game team talks, I have heard players do it. As a referee, I have NEVER lost a match. I don’t play. I referee play. I could care less what FIFA thinks about the outcome of the final. I watched and I think I’m pretty confident in saying the referee had very little to do with the outcome of the match.
With all due respect, you are misreading the laws. By definition, something that could result in a pk is a serious incident. Several people on here who have a much higher working knowledge of the laws have tried to tell you this, but you won't listen. I will grant you that the IFAB is not always a model of clarity in writing, but your interpretation is not correct.
Matuidi, obviously. The guy who missed or grazed it at the last second causing it to hit Perisic. I'm pretty convinced 99% of people saying it was intentional have done so after watching the slow motion replay, which you are not supposed to do. But it doesn't matter, because the majority of former refs and players are in agreement with me anyway.
I'll be honest -- when I watch the slow motion, I don't think that it's deliberate handling. When I watch it at speed, I feel that it is deliberate handling (by all of the considerations that IFAB/FIFA share).