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

Beating a dead horse, but no, it didn't drop like a stone, it continued in a natural arc as can be seen as clear as day by the side view of the kick.

In no way did the ball ricochet off the cable directly to the feet of Anderson like a gift from heaven. Like I said before, I don't 100% discount the possibility that it may have imperceptibly grazed the cable. However, the relatively steeper descent vs ascent is not unusual and could have easily been caused by excessive back spin on the ball.

 

It’s a weird thing for players to complain about if it didn’t happen. That to me is some of the most convincing evidence that something happened

 

Really? Players complain about stuff that doesn't happen all the time.

And we don't know who originated the idea of hit hitting a cable. It might be just one player (e.g. the goalie) says he saw it hit the cable, and the rest of the Norwegian team run with it. It's in their best interest to say that the goal is invalid, and they're going to back their teammate no matter what.

 

I've seen a ball hit a player square in the face, and opposition players appeal for handball. Players appeal for loads of things that don't happen (or they think that happened but didn't)

 

You're being ridiculous. Grow up.

You might be surprised to learn that FIFA controls the video rights. This is a captured still before the footage was locked down. Now, since you have decided that only a video of a player pointing at the wire during play is sufficient to say they thought it hit the wire, then there's nothing left to talk about. You can sit patiently with your thumb up your ass all ********ing day for all I care.

 

Totally, but thinking the ball hit a cable is not something you’d typically invent

 

Yeah, I was trying to track down the tactical cam footage of the game, so I could review this event. But, alas, I cannot find it.

 

I'm not even saying it hit the wire. I'm just exhausted by trolls claiming that no one on Norway indicated a concern. Players did.

 

Surely you are joking here?

PH

 

I don't think people are actually saying that Norwegian players did not voice their concern. It's more about when did they voice their concern. It's unclear to me as to when the Norwegian goalkeeper voiced his concern. The clips from Fox and from TSN are cut up, and it is ambiguous if it happens immediately after the goal, or if it happens at half time. Watching a replay of the play from the television feed makes it seem nobody reacts when it happens in real time.

 

Where is the timestamp and score for that probably cropped image?

 

It won't matter, they'll say that FIFA altered the timestamp

 

That's not how I saw it is an acceptable justification. A non-existent rule about stepping in front of someone isn't.

 

It seems to drop like a stone and yet Anderson stays in the same place and waits for the ball to drop to him?

 

I like it when regular guys from the ref page make bad assessments.

 

I concede your point that the only evidence you accept is that which supports your conclusion.

I know not to engage with someone who has faith.

 

You should look in the mirror and read that post to yourself.

 

Showing someone pointing in the air after the fact is not evidence that something occurred. Not to mention that eye witness evidence is the most unreliable evidence as humans are inherently biased (unconsciously so). Evidence has been put forth to show that it most likely did not hit the cable.

Here:

https://www.dday.it/redazione/58034...-quando-la-tecnologia-smentisce-la-tecnologia

And here:

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1487668823112195

And here:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DatUPF3PAE5/?igsh=MTY5MWl5b3YybnhsdQ==

The only evidence for hitting the wire is Norwegians pointing to the sky.

 

Sick burn, bro.

 

Here is the clearest video I've seen to date on what happened to the ball on the goal kick. This should put to rest any further debate.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1004137585783750

 

Ha ha!

Makes sense.

 

But (A) would they have done so if they hadn't seen something amiss?

And (B) here's The Guardian's analysis ...

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...y-have-been-disallowed-england-world-cup-2026

As for the first link, I'll cite the great philosopher/science... fiction writer Douglas Adams:

Bottom line -- this is going to be even more difficult to prove one way or the other than the third English goal in the 1966 final. Yes, I know a bunch of physicists believe they proved it didn't cross the line, but I'll add a story on physicists: I used to tell people who were new to curling that if you asked 10 different physicists to explain why curling rocks curl the way they do, you'd get eight different answers. A physicist at the curling club took offense. He insisted there would be 12 different answers.

 

@Beau Dure's link should put to rest the discussion over "when" Norway complained at least. Clearly after the goal was scored the goalkeeper and the bench (but not the manager) pointed it out. I would guess Haaland's demonstrations were at the same time given that but we don't know for sure.

 

1) Are you making the call to overturn the goal in real time?

2) Hypothetically if you had all the evidence in real time that has been presented after the fact would you have overturned the goal?

I will just point out that the Guardian statement that "The sudden, sharp descent of the ball towards Anderson" is a fact not in evidence.

Also both Anderson and the Norway defender are moving towards the ball as they're following its downward path. Anderson is more aggressively pursuing the ball and the Norway defender is lolly gagging towards it, but moving towards as it's in the air, nonetheless.