It's worth noting that would look more offside than not offside, given the movement of players. So worth noting it's good from Parker. Because awarding that goal via VAR would have looked a lot uglier than it being given after a check.
Well done to end the 1H like that. Couple technical mistakes but personality and strong assistant referees providing for smooth game.
aaannnddd the commentators. We NEED this technology! How can the naked eye see that!!! It didn't, we just played on and it was really no big deal. They ACTUALLY think that those millimeters they can tell by offside now is actually in line with the law that was created to stop "Unfair" advantages from a player being in an offside position. Can't see the forest for the trees....
Given the timing of the flag and whistle at the same moment Atkins definitely called it on the mic first. Perfectly executed.
On the G, the JPN player on the nearside, coming back onside, wasn't helping AR see the offside line clearly. Cheers, Mi3ke
I wouldn't say definitely. Don't put it past Elfath to tell Atkins he was giving it and that he wanted confirmation. But good teammwork either way.
I did not clearly see the incident in 51’ but his management was excellent Croatian players accepted his decision quickly and without much fuss
52' No penalty given. He does a good job to cool the protest and sell it. He had a choice there to double down on the Ronaldo call and instead he decided maybe that wasn't the road ti go down again.
He could have decided to go for the gray area decision, but he didn't. We didn't like the first one, this one would have been worse but could have also been "defensible" with the little bit of jersey hold and leg contact. Anyway, glad he didn't.
I don’t disagree overall but kicking Ronaldo who goes down and some Croatian player getting held and going down are quite different decisions.
I am really enjoying this match. I think the set up by Elfath in the first half has this thing playing in a very entertaining fashion. I was woried on a couple passes he took early, but the players accepted and adjusted and SO FAR it's working.
Okay. I mean I think a leg challenge at speed when the attacker in possession of the ball goes to ground is fundamentally different than these aerial balls where the attacker who can't get on the end of the ball goes to ground. But more importantly, I think, I reject the implication that Elfath thought his previous decision was "grey" AND/OR that he would be thinking about it at all here. Your use of "double down" is what felt tone deaf to me, because it could imply a lot of negative things to non-referees. I think we just seem to look at things a lot differently here, but we both think the no-call is proper so it doesn't matter much in the end.
I'll let it go with this, but even "choices" over "decisions" sounds really odd to me. At least when talking about KMIs.
You mean the US vs. Netherlands wasn't competitive? I thought if Pulisic scored that goal the US wins per the great analysis fo Alexi Lalas, Clint Dempsey and Landon Donovan. By the way the Guardian had a scathing take down of FOX'S coverage at this World Cup. It's been terrible. I don't mind the "ra-ra, go go USA" (it is after all a US network) to an extent. But it's all they have. Maybe it's just bias, with their playing pedigree and accents, but Henry and Carragher on CBS during the CL coverage are just so much better than any US pundit. They need a little bit of that with a nuanced international presence instead of Piers Morgan.
On a more global note, 5th game of the KO and so far we've basically had 10 teams trying to play good soccer. Very little of playing for the calls and/orj injustices.