but at that point it would matter what the referee said he saw though right? If he said he saw a touch then maybe you don't have clear and obvious under the protocol. But even if he thought he saw a touch, is barely a touch really enough to take away what's a pretty clear foul? Even a bigger touch that also includes a foul should still be a foul in my opinion
Don't worry when the US is drawing against some CA country during the octagonal there will be plus three.
He is not an expert in international refereeing. He was never a FIFA referee. Most of his refereeing experience was in domestic indoor soccer. I have no idea why Fox continues to use him when there are actual experienced former international referees available. PH
I get that, but... Player had a choice to attack goal or even stop and probably get call. He chose to go to corner. Dumb.
I don’t think he really did have a chance with where that ball was going to attack—though I really would have liked to see it again (but I’m too lazy to look for it). Live I thought it was just a terrible use of advantage as I don’t see how it could possibly have been a better opportunity that a FK near the top of the area. To me it was so clearly not an advantage I was wondering if his arm was doing something else.
good ol' mass confrontation looks like a pk to me has Dr. Joe been right about anything in this tournament?
So, did the VAR check the potential foul on how Mexico gained possession. Live I thought it was a foul, but alas didn’t have my DVR or so I can’t go back an look.