IFAB can change the scope of VAR review as a result of this incident, but as far as I'm aware this was by the book. There was no possession change after the foul, the foul led to the APP and resulted in a goal.
Too damn tired from traveling to look up the protocols, but last I knew everything is open to review from the start of the APP.
I also think it sucked. I turned it off after Argentina's third. Apparently there was a similar situation on that goal that would've chalked it off (and maybe given Egypt a penalty), but I haven't seen it and don't know if that is a legit gripe.
In general, I think it is obvious Messi gets favorable treatment.
goal and am wondering if that the two compare.
to be called. They showed it during the game and I did not feel it strong enough for a penalty though there is hand fighting and a tug of the shirt. The kid describing the video obviously feels different. The odd thing was that it seemed there was no VAR review. Even after Argentina scores on the next possession.
The one on Salah was though. It would have been soft and unfortunate, but the dude stepped on him. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that had the situations been reversed, then Argentina would not have had that goal taken away due to foul in the build up, and would have been awarded a penalty in that situation.
That shirt pull wasn't a pen. But if I'm being honest, it wouldn't surprise me if it was given to Argentina depending on the circumstances of the match.
I appreciate the reference to the rules at least.
But he’s basically arguing that every shirt tug is a yellow card. If a match was being officiated that way (which would be annoying) then yes it’s a pen. But there’s no way the ref had been calling shirt tugs all match.
The Salah one isn't a pen. Defender got a clean touch, Salah initiated the contact with the defender's planted leg after. We may not be talking about the same play, however.
Yes defender got a touch on the ball. Then went in again on the loose ball and you see his foot go on top of Salah.
Defender’s leg definitely not planted.
And FWIW, I definitely would not have called it in real time or VAR. I'm saying had the situations been reversed, the refs would have given it to Argentina.
Salah makes the first move to change his momentum and cut back. He has possession at this point. The defender starts dragging his foot and does touch the ball. The ball now bounces off Salah's other leg behind him. The two players now continue their existing momentum in opposite directions. Salah starts to turn his body to look for the ball behind him and the defender's foot drags through Salah's pivoting foot that is supporting all of his weight.
The Swedish referee that has been doing stories on the gram on all of these calls stated the difference was that the contact on the overturned goal was hard, and that the contact on the not overturned goal was soft. Is this really based on a slow-motion video determination of force? It does make one wonder, if the Salah contest happened outside of the penalty area would they be more willing to call this "soft" foul.
What was the instigating event that led to the VAR law being written this way? Is this all to prevent another Maradona Hand of God? Perhaps that juice is not worth the squeeze.
I agree with your view of it.
Having said that, I also agree that Argentina has gotten a suspicious number of calls in their favor and that had the tables been reversed a penalty may have been awarded for the shirt tug “foul.” I hate conspiracies but the Messi non-call has me a bit torqued up. I just can’t see how any official or VAR did not at least raise it to the level of a yellow card. By the book, it was a red but there was a lack of courage. It happens and it stinks.
I will say that the part of the game I get most frustrated with when I talk to my fellow Americans who do not follow the sport is trying to explain that futbol is a physical game. A certain amount of hand fighting, shoulder to shoulder collisions, and bodying is allowed. All I get back is the mindless stuff I have been seeing in the BackRoom which goes something like “soft soccer playing flopping pussies” No lover of soccer likes flopping but to not appreciate the elite physical condition and strength these guys have is crazy. Imagine having to body Lukaku or someone like Drogba back in the day? Fuhgetabout it.
There was a far worse incident in Germany's match against Paraguay that went uncalled and unchecked by VAR. Something I'd have personally given, but appears they've set a high threshold for that.
I suspect that someone defending the decision could say that it was like overturning a 90 yard fumble return for a TD because replay showed that the quarterback's knee was down on the sack/fumble. Often the refs will err on the side of not whistling the play dead in order to let the fumble return effort play out, pending the automatic replay review.
But to me this felt more like it was overturning a Niners TD run on 3rd & goal by Christian McCaffrey because replay showed that Matthew Stafford's knee was down on the sack/fumble from the Rams previous possession.
Thinking about it more, I suppose a better analogy would be an NBA fast break. Rambis blocks McHale's shot, Murdoch picks up the loose ball, passes it to Magic who dribbles in between DJ & Ainge, and dishes to Worthy for a slaaaaam dunk. As the Forum blasts "I Love LA" and Dyan Cannon's boobs are bouncing up & down, the ref goes to VAR and waives off the basket because he determines that Rambis' blocked shot on the previous possession should have been called a foul. I mean, yeah the successful blocked shot led to the successful fast break. But those were separate plays. As a non-soccer fan, the idea of reversing the result of a play based on the butterfly effect of a play that happened beforehand is a foreign concept.
In this case, Egypt's ensuing possession included 3 passes and a dribble through the middle of a double-team. This was not a breakaway dunk. Again, I don't pretend to be a soccer aficionado but if I were making the rule I would suggest that in order to consider overturning a defensive non-call that leads to an offensive score, then it should be like a breakaway dunk. Maybe the bright line you draw is that a defensive foul is not reviewable if the offense made more than 1 pass on the ensuing possession. So if an Egyptian player had stolen the ball near the Argentine goal and then passed it to a teammate for an easy tap-in, then the non-call on the steal should be reviewable. But if Egypt had to pass the ball 2 or more times in order to take advantage of the non-call, then tough shit.
In the LA Coliseum. They did everything they could to keep Argentina in the tournament.