Why Japans goal was allowed to stand.

Sanchez D-S said:
Sounness was bealing in the studio post match.

"SHOW US THE CLOSE UP FIFA!!"

Brilliant :D
Click to expand...
c5704-16699629566660-1920.jpg
 
Ted Rangers said:
Except in this case it is black and white.
Click to expand...
The decision might be, but the fact it took 12 hours to establish the facts when it could have been dealt with in about 60 seconds with a better communication process is the problem. You dont think that's an issue in a crucial World Cup incident - the pinnacle of the sport?

That's not what people want when they watch football and it is not what VAR promised. I mean if they are so f88king useless to organise this themselves, can they not just pinch ideas from Rugby Union?
 
Tpol_rfc said:
Mate really don't get what was wrong with that decision. Would you rather it was flagged for offside by a linesman guessing rather than the factual decision VAR gave us?
Click to expand...
Do you not understand that its not just about the decision being correct?
 
Bristol_bnose3 said:
The decision might be, but the fact it took 12 hours to establish the facts when it could have been dealt with in about 60 seconds with a better communication process is the problem. You dont think that's an issue in a crucial World Cup incident - the pinnacle of the sport?

That's not what people want when they watch football and it is not what VAR promised. I mean if they are so f88king useless to organise this themselves, can they not just pinch ideas from Rugby Union?
Click to expand...
The implementation of VAR is poor. It isn't VAR that's the problem, it's the idiots using it.

Black and white decisions like this should take 2 seconds at most to clear up.

The goal line technology is better than VAR, because nobody needs to look at it (and even when they should, they don't).

They should definitely look at Rugby Union as an example. They are quick, the main referee can discuss the incident in real time with the other officials, and the fans can see it all.

Another rugby rule be should be taking immediately is the Head Injury Assessment.
 
Opalescent said:
Why? Davis fucked it and the keeper saved anyway.
Click to expand...
If you watch Davis shot , the angle from Davis viewpoint as he strikes it, it’s going in. It takes not one but two very slight deflections off Frankfurt defenders, one last touch is enough to deflect it over the bar. If it doesn’t take the touches off either defender, that ball is going in. 100%. Davis struck it perfectly.

The fact the referee/linesman didn’t give a corner but gave a goal kick , adds fuel to the idea that they assumed the ball was out when Roofe got to it. Only other explanation is they missed two pretty obvious deflections on Davis shot and thought it went clean over.

It just wasn’t meant to be. Frankfurt got the millimetres at that moment and in the shootout which decided it.
 
Bluebeard said:
If you watch Davis shot , the angle from Davis viewpoint as he strikes it, it’s going in. It takes not one but two very slight deflections off Frankfurt defenders, one last touch is enough to deflect it over the bar. If it doesn’t take the touches off either defender, that ball is going in. 100%. Davis struck it perfectly.

The fact the referee/linesman didn’t give a corner but gave a goal kick , adds fuel to the idea that they assumed the ball was out when Roofe got to it. Only other explanation is they missed two pretty obvious deflections on Davis shot and thought it went clean over.

It just wasn’t meant to be. Frankfurt got the millimetres at that moment and in the shootout which decided it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, granted we should have got a corner. Doubt it would have made any difference, as you say it wasn't meant to be sadly.
 
Bristol_bnose3 said:
The decision might be, but the fact it took 12 hours to establish the facts when it could have been dealt with in about 60 seconds with a better communication process is the problem. You dont think that's an issue in a crucial World Cup incident - the pinnacle of the sport?

That's not what people want when they watch football and it is not what VAR promised. I mean if they are so f88king useless to organise this themselves, can they not just pinch ideas from Rugby Union?
Click to expand...
It didn't take 12 hours though. The goal was given during the game.
 
AchtungBaby said:
It didn't take 12 hours though. The goal was given during the game.
Click to expand...
Without wishing to repeat myself, do you not think a clearer and quicker method of understanding how they reach these decisions would be beneficial to the game?

Not to mention the other incidents which appear to be as arbitrary and non-scientific as the old ref on the pitch format. (Argentina's penalty against Poland for example)
 
TN8 said:
This is now making me feel a bit sick about that Kent miss right at the end in Seville. Had written it off because the ball looked out before Roofe crossed it but not so sure now...
Click to expand...

Exactly how I'm seeing it.

Now all I can think about if Kent had stuck that sitter away I'd still be drunk celebrating.
 
The ball was not out - the whole ball has to be over the line, and the stills and the view of it from over the top of the ball shows that it was not all over the line.

The referee & linesman are maybe incredibly lucky with the call though because there’s no way that the naked eye can make that decision, especially at a distance.
 
TN8 said:
This is now making me feel a bit sick about that Kent miss right at the end in Seville. Had written it off because the ball looked out before Roofe crossed it but not so sure now...
Click to expand...
I've had a feeling all along it would have stood. Sickening
 
TN8 said:
This is now making me feel a bit sick about that Kent miss right at the end in Seville. Had written it off because the ball looked out before Roofe crossed it but not so sure now...
Click to expand...

Exactly what I thought.
 
Imagine the glorious scenes if we win at the piggery with that exact same goal and put us above them going into the split. VAR would need to go into hiding.
 
Bristol_bnose3 said:
Without wishing to repeat myself, do you not think a clearer and quicker method of understanding how they reach these decisions would be beneficial to the game?

Not to mention the other incidents which appear to be as arbitrary and non-scientific as the old ref on the pitch format. (Argentina's penalty against Poland for example)
Click to expand...
It is very clear. Can’t really see what is hard to understand here or what FIFA could have done differently.

Just media people making a noise.
 
TN8 said:
This is now making me feel a bit sick about that Kent miss right at the end in Seville. Had written it off because the ball looked out before Roofe crossed it but not so sure now...
Click to expand...
Aye, thanks for that.

Now I'm away to freeze-frame the footage from the final and get my measuring tape out. Might head for the Erskine Bridge afterwards.
 
TN8 said:
This is now making me feel a bit sick about that Kent miss right at the end in Seville. Had written it off because the ball looked out before Roofe crossed it but not so sure now...
Click to expand...
It wouldn't have been ruled out. The referee and linesman had let play continue. VAR was only getting involved in clear and obvious errors in the Europa last season. There weren't any pictures that showed the ball clearly out so couldn't have seen it been ruled out by VAR officials.
 
PT98 said:
That's the whole point.

He missed a complete sitter but everyone consoles themselves with the belief it wouldn't have stood anyway.

Now it looks like there is a fair chance the ball never went out and it would have stood. Therefore that sitter would have won us the cup
Click to expand...

Just went on youtube and watched it again.

Not seen any of that match since 18th of may.

No way was the full ball over the line.

Kent... :(
 
Bristol_bnose3 said:
The decision might be, but the fact it took 12 hours to establish the facts when it could have been dealt with in about 60 seconds with a better communication process is the problem. You dont think that's an issue in a crucial World Cup incident - the pinnacle of the sport?

That's not what people want when they watch football and it is not what VAR promised. I mean if they are so f88king useless to organise this themselves, can they not just pinch ideas from Rugby Union?
Click to expand...
It didnt. They established the facts pretty quickly and gave the goal. They even gave the overhanging explanation on commentary.
 
PT98 said:
That's the whole point.

He missed a complete sitter but everyone consoles themselves with the belief it wouldn't have stood anyway.

Now it looks like there is a fair chance the ball never went out and it would have stood. Therefore that sitter would have won us the cup
Click to expand...

Each to their own I suppose, I certainly don't console myself with that. Only thought about that incident when I saw the post.

Ramsay failing with his spot kick and the pish defending at their goal lost us the cup.
 
Last edited:
It looks like the ball is overhanging the line by about 1mm.

Amazing that if the Japan player has got to the ball about 0.1 second later the ball would have been out of play and Germany would probably have gone through.

Sometimes there are fine margins in football
 
Bristol_bnose3 said:
The wider point still stands. FIFA have made a c88nt of using VAR in play. No surprises there.
Click to expand...
There is a lack of communication between VAR decisions and the public, it seems deliberateas well. Which is a problem when youve got a tournament being watched by hundreds of millions of people round the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top