Yes, same as in the NFL, if the game has VAR every goal is reviewed.
[Reply]

You should be a little more skeptical of your judgment about what is what and what proves what.

Go ahead and make your case about why a crucial decision in the FIFA World Cup ought to be decided by what a commentator says about what an Assistant Referee who could not see shit did with a flag.

All those migrant workers died building these venues so that we could have a system that fucking stupid?
[Reply]

Ghana fans ��pic.twitter.com/XFdeVpxvYJ

— Troll Football (@TrollFootball) December 2, 2022

[Reply]

So when does it trigger?

For instance, in the NFL, if the officials get together, huddle and rule the runner stepped OOB at the 2, the official call on the field will 'supersede' a score review because they effectively nullified the score before it happened.

That's why officials will often defer a bit on those decisions - to get it to a review.

Could that be the discussion that was being had by the commentators? That if the official on the field called it OOB, there was no 'goal to review'?

Then again, it almost seems like the commentators said the exact opposite of that. Mostly it seems like the broadcast team duffed it but the officials got it right.
[Reply]

I'm talking about going to the box and reviewing it.

Nonethless we all know VAR watches every goal/offsides etc, so I must have misspoke.

What I'm saying is what was the call on the field prior to going to the VAR? If there wasn't a call on the field, and after using VAR they said they used the call on the field, that simply doesn't make sense.
[Reply]

So the way it works is if it is an active goal scoring opportunity they are to hold their whistle/flag until the opportunity is clearly over. If there was something like a possible offside 30 yards out and it is an obvious no they will tell the referee over the radio it is good.

So unless it is a bang bang play like this often the referee already knows it is good or bad so it looks like there was no VAR involvement.

If the referee had blown the whistle when it appeared to be out then the play is over. No goal even if it was an incorrect whistle. They would go with a goal kick as no one would have questioned it. If they did review and say oops, i should not have blown the whistle and the correct restart would have been a drop ball to Japan from the closest point on the 6yd box from where the ball was when the whistle was blown. If it had been outside the 6 when the whistle was blown it would be at that spot.
[Reply]

Don't listen to any American commentator about soccer. They are morons.

There was no call on the field by the Referee. I believe the AR did try to signal goal kick but the referee who makes the final decision never did. You can see him talking over his comms to VAR as soon as the ball is in the net.
[Reply]

I think you are right that the field referee never pointed to the center circle signaling a goal until more than 3 minutes after the ball crossed the line and VAR made a ruling.

I also believe that he never pointed to the goal to signal a goal kick, which he would have to do to make that ruling no matter what was signaled by the Assistant Referee. I also believe that if he did point to the goal to signal goal kick, he would have told VAR that he did not see the ball cross the end line and neither did the assistant.

This idea that an original ruling deserving deference must be made by humans who could not possibly see the ball relative to the end line is an anachronism that makes no sense.

I guess you finally see the point I have made the whole time. I have seen no proof of field referee calling goal kick or goal before 53:20 on game clock which was after the ball crossed the line at 49:49 on the game clock.

I did not appreciate Alexi Lalas talking his nonsense about an original call being overturned in spite of a ruling that video evidence was inconclusive when he had no idea of the original call and what the VAR ruled about what the video evidence showed.

I suppose you now realize that I am correct and that you were duped by Alexi Lalas.

Not sure why you had to call me names and complain about my posts when you end up agreeing with my points. Maybe you disagreed with something I posted in some long forgotten thread and that kept you from understanding my posts and you could not help but get mad and spit out some personal shit.
[Reply]

[Reply]

This WC is wild
[Reply]

Man, Croatian women are fine. When I was over there I saw a 10/10 smoke show about once an hour.
[Reply]

Yeah, a lot of Eastern European women are like that. I love the look on that kid’s face :-)
[Reply]

:-). Not in this WC, but funny.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTR4ho4vw/
[Reply]

If you are watching the Brazil vs Camaroon game AR1, Kyle Atkins, is from KC.
[Reply]

The World Cup balls are charged before every game. The balls used at the World Cup in Qatar have a high-tech sensor which needs to be charged.

The sensor is powered by a small battery, which Adidas said can last for six hours of active use, or up to 18 days when not. The sensor, which weighs just 14 grams, gives ball-tracking in real-time; with cameras positioned around the pitch helping referees to determine offside and other questionable decisions.

Any time the ball is kicked, headed, thrown or even so much as tapped, the system picks it up at 500 frames per second. Data is sent in real time from sensors to a local positioning system (LPS), which involves a setup of network antennas installed around the playing field that take in and store the data for immediate use.

When a ball flies out of bounds during the course of play, and a new ball is thrown or kicked in to replace it, KINEXON’s backend system automatically switches to the new ball’s data input without the need for human intervention.
[Reply]