Match 99 [QF] : NOR : ENG - TURPIN (FRA)

and, I’m talking about mistakes made by your team that clearly impacted the match. The goal kick came up short. It was also 70 yards from goal. I’m tired of every team that loses blaming officiating when there are 10-15 opportunities to put the ball in the net each match where nothing materializes as I mentioned the 2v1 specifically. How is that not put in? .

 

Before England’s goal in minute 45+2 against Norway, the sensor in the Connected Ball showed no peak in the 'heartbeat of the ball' when in the air, and therefore no evidence that the ball touched the overhead wire and changed the movement of the ball. pic.twitter.com/gYf9ukfveT

— FIFA Media (@fifamedia) July 11, 2026

[/QUOTE]

I think it’s reasonable to assume the x-axis represents time.

what physical property does the y-axis represent?

It seems a little bit strange to me that whatever it is, the onset of the waveform of a ball being kicked with force is similarly vertical to that of a ball being controlled. If the English player’s first touch was a pass to a teammate I might expect it to look at least a little bit similar to the goal kick.

Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but FIFA has openly demonstrated its willingness and ability to just make stuff up to suit their purposes without further explanation this tournament (see Balogun decision).

who’s to say they couldn’t just make up a squiggly line to suit their purposes too?

 

Others have also pointed out that in previous instances a flatline was shown but now there is a minor wave in 'non-contact'.

edit: Portugal vs Croatia was flatline in the graph. Now they showed some minor movements while in air.

 

Can you point out the exact time the ball touched the wire?
I have no clue what some of you are seeing

 

[QUOTE="Fubious, post: 43840593, member: ]
Presumably, the y axis is acceleration. My understanding is the sensor is an accelerometer.

I'd be curious to know what the scale is. It must be some sort of non-linear scale given that a full kick from a professional GK and a almost imperceptible touch off someone's head can appear only 2 or 3x different in magnitude on the graph.

 

I think it’s reasonable to assume the x-axis represents time.

what physical property does the y-axis represent?

It seems a little bit strange to me that whatever it is, the onset of the waveform of a ball being kicked with force is similarly vertical to that of a ball being controlled. If the English player’s first touch was a pass to a teammate I might expect it to look at least a little bit similar to the goal kick.

Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but FIFA has openly demonstrated its willingness and ability to just make stuff up to suit their purposes without further explanation this tournament (see Balogun decision).

who’s to say they couldn’t just make up a squiggly line to suit their purposes too?[/QUOTE]

The x-axis is time, and the y-axis is the magnitude of the acceleration measured by the IMU (inertial measurement unit) inside the ball.

Acceleration is the change in velocity over a period of time.

When the ball is initially kicked, it has zero velocity, and we see the blip that takes it from zero velocity to the velocity it has immediately after the kick.

When the ball is in flight, the only accelerations it is experiencing are those due to gravity (which the IMU cannot detect) and those due to aerodynamic forces (drag). We can see from the graph that there are small fluctuations, which is consistent with the drag forces applying very little acceleration on the ball relative to a kick or a trap.

When the ball is trapped by the English player he is decelerating the ball from its velocity just before it's about to hit the ground (which should be approximately the same as the velocity of the ball immediately after the goal kick due to the conservation of energy) to near zero velocity. In other words the change in velocity of the goal kick 0 to some initial velocity post kick (v0) would be nearly identical to the change of velocity from the velocity the ball has as it approaches the ground (roughly the same as v0) back down to near 0 velocity. Therefore, the magnitude in the change of velocity, which is what the accelerometer in the IMU is measuring would be very similar between the goal kick and the trap by the English player.

 

You're assuming they are showing the same scale of the y-axis in two different instances. I would assume the scale in the Croatia game was much smaller than the one shown here.

I would love for them to show the full graph in the Croatia game from the initial kick to when the goal is scored. Then we can see for ourselves the relative magnitude between each impulse.

 

I believe it is used in all offside determinations. It was only used twice to determine if a hit was detected. In all other instances it is used to determine when the hit is detected, so it can sync the timing of the hit with the positions of the player.

The Sweden incident and the Croatia incident are special because they used the sensor to determine if a hit occurred in the first place, in order to reset the offside positioning of the players.

 

If the y-axis shows acceleration, why are both the blips positive? Shouldn’t the trap be negative?

Furthermore the whole point of trapping the ball is to decelerate it slowly. I don’t really buy that the shape of the deceleration of cushioning the ball to control it should look anything at all like the ball getting blasted for a goal kick.

so I really think it has to be something else.

 

Because we don’t care if the ball is accelerating or decelerating just that its velocity is changing. So you just graph the absolute value of the acceleration.

 

It is been in use since 2022. It was used extensively to determine offside. To determine the exact moment a ball was hit

https://news.adidas.com/football/ad...nology/s/cccb7187-a67c-4166-b57d-2b28f1d36fa0

It was also used for Sweden vs Tunisia

Do we now have 'snicko' in football?

Sweden beat Tunisia 5-1, but their fourth goal, scored by Mattias Svanberg, was initially ruled out for offside

Following a VAR review, the goal was given with Alexander Isak adjudged to have touched the ball on its way through to Svanberg.… pic.twitter.com/dElVkjr5BV

— The Athletic | Football (@TheAthleticFC) June 15, 2026

It was used to disallow Lukaku's goal vs Slovakia at Euro 2024. I remember very well because that was our group. Well one of his goals .... the guy had like 3 in 2024

And it was used maaany times for automatic offside

 

It's showing magnitude, so absolute value.

When you say trapping the ball decelerates it slowly, are you saying the time in which the player initiates contact with the ball out of the air to when the ball comes to a stop is significantly longer than when a ball is kicked from 0 velocity to its initial free-flight velocity?

 

I’m surprised to hear this. I would have sworn I read an article saying this was new technology introduced at this tournament.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...slovakia-reaction-var-domenico-tedesco-lukaku

Romelu Lukaku was denied on both occasions in the 1-0 loss, the second especially controversial with a cricket-style “snickometer” used to determine whether Loïs Openda had handled the ball in the buildup

 

Not under the laws of the game.

 

I’m kind of amazed that a video from the phone of a fan in the stadium hasn’t surfaced yet which shows more clearly what happened with the ball and the wire.

 

You’re in the wrong thread for that. This thread is about referee performance.

 

There's two things I always love about conspiracy theories:

1) They always require a combination of elite foresight and planning, but also staggering incompetence.

2) The conspiracy is always unnecessarily complicated.

Stuff like, "the government successfully coordinated a massive attack and conspiracy cover-up on US soil involving a combination of flying jetliners into buildings (while also, for some reason, planting demolition explosives inside them) -- and yet forget to check what temperature jet fuel burns at".

Or in this case: FIFA coordinated with a team of international officials to make a decision in the 1-2 minutes after a goal was awarded to not disallow the goal, and then rather than just say the camera angle was inconclusive or that the incident was missed, they created a fake chip-in-ball graphic -- but oh, when doing so, nobody thought about what the wave form on the trap should look like.

Just seems like there would be easier ways for FIFA to pick winners if they wanted to.

 

We’re in Richard Hofstadter territory now.