The 2022 World Cup group stage has not ended, Vn88 mobile sports magazine said that the controversies related to the referee’s decisions have surpassed double digits. As of November 30, VAR alone has made 16 decisions directly related to situations leading to goals. More than half of them failed to convince the majority.
The decision to blow the penalty in Portugal’s 3-2 win over Ghana was one of the most controversial topics reported by Vn88cx right after the match. Former Nigeria international, Sunday Oliseh, a member of FIFA’s technical subcommittee, called Ronaldo’s penalty fall against Ghana in the first series of matches, as CR7 waited for the right moment to make the opponent foul.
However, some angles indicate that Ghana midfielder Mohammed Salisu did not have a big enough impact to make Ronaldo fall like that. The problem here is that the VAR doesn’t intervene when the referee blows 11 meters. Ghana coach, Otto Addo, stated: “I don’t know if the VAR referee is focused anymore”.
Mike Dean, a famous former Premier League referee, also wondered when VAR did not intervene to make a more accurate decision. He said: “The Ghana defender obviously played the ball. Ronaldo then touched the defender’s back, fell, took the initiative to earn a penalty. It was not the referee’s fault – he made the decision on the pitch. Theo Vn88, VAR must step in and invite the referee to come and watch.”
Dale Johnson, a football law expert, said that if the referee did not blow the penalty, it is unlikely that VAR would determine the error in that situation. Because the slow-motion tape shows that the impact of the midfielder on Ronaldo is not large enough.
Why didn’t VAR get involved in that situation? FIFA has not given a clear explanation, and it only makes the fog around many decisions of the “black shirt kings” more blurred.
After that, Portugal continued to benefit from the 11-meter mark in the match against Uruguay. Central defender Gimenez let the ball touch his hand in the penalty area when he fell, VAR intervened, causing the referee to change the decision and blow a penalty, helping Bruno Fernandes to score a 2-0 win.
IFAB’s new 2021 rule (International Football Association Vn88.cx) interprets a player’s handball not to be caught when that part of his body assists in falling or getting up from the ground, roughly “the state of being” natural posture” and do not intentionally play the ball with your hands.
Gimenez’s ball meets all the conditions to be considered “unintentional handball” in the new IFAB rules. However, the final decision is still up to the referee. This is the blur of the law of touching hands in the forbidden area that makes many fans angry.
Even when IFAB announced to Vn88 mobile on the adjustment and simplification of the law of touching in the penalty area, the referee and VAR still caused controversial decisions. Was VAR correct to intervene in that situation because the referee initially ignored Gimenez? Why did VAR intervene to lead to a penalty in the Portugal – Uruguay match without reviewing the situation where the referee blew the penalty in the Portugal – Ghana match?
That’s another inconsistency in the way VAR is used at this year’s World Cup. Canada is also another team with the right to press. In their 0-1 loss to Belgium in the first set, the CONCACAF representative was denied two penalties in the first half. After Tajon Buchanan was fouled in the penalty area by Jan Vertonghen, the match referee, Janny Sikazwe and his assistants believed that the Canadian player had been offside before.
What Vn88cx is saying here, Buchanan has never been offside because he received a pass from Eden Hazard. Later slow motion shows Buchanan being stepped on by Vertonghen. There is a view that Vertonghen hit the ball first, so VAR did not intervene. However, this has not been confirmed by VAR. If VAR asked the referee to come out and review the situation and make his own decision, things would be clearer. In the end, Canada lost the opportunity to consider blowing a penalty because the referee team misjudged the offside situation.
Canada was then denied another penalty at the end of the first half, after Witsel fouled Laryea in the penalty area. This situation is even more obvious than the previous ball. Referee Sikazwe and VAR team again did not give a penalty for Canada. It should be remembered that Mr. Sikazwe caused a scandal in the CAN Cup earlier this year, when the match between Mali and Tunisia ended in the 85th minute. The fact that FIFA still let this referee arrest in the 2022 World Cup made many people question.