QAT:ECU Matchday 1 - Orsato (ITA)

[JamesL]

All I can say is that images doesn't match what the video shows. Could just be optical illusion but in the video the player is well onside.

I think it must be optical trickery.

Here is the video:


Here is the In line:

And again the reverse angle:



All taken at around the same point, close enough that the positioning doesn't change.

We have to trust the tech here imo. The offside player is the next person to play the ball following the touch from the player challenging GK which is the only questionable part of it for me, although I think the way the ball goes up in the air is consistent with glove to ball to Ecuador head

 

[Peter Grove]

Where is the ball? In this image?

Touching the head of Estupinian (the Ecuador player second up from the bottom of the image, and who is challenging the keeper). This is the decisive point of the last touch by a team mate before the player who committed the offside offence (Estrada), headed the ball.

Estrada is the Ecuador player closest to the bottom of the image. After this image, the ball went up in the air, came down, bounced off the ground and then Estrada headed it.

I've since watched a few replays and knowing the full sequence of events it seems clear to me now, that the correct decision was reached.

 

[QuaverRef]

Good call. Impossible to spot without the VAR and could be used by commentators to educate the public a bit. Problem is they had no clue themselves. To all those who say "that's not what VAR was brought for" I would just say that in this case we should do away with the offside rule.

Crisp boy will do anything within his power to slate VAR, even ignoring a factually correct decision just because he himself didn’t spot it

 

[Mr Dean]

I think it must be optical trickery.

Here is the video:

View attachment 6152
Here is the In line:
View attachment 6153
And again the reverse angle:

View attachment 6154

All taken at around the same point, close enough that the positioning doesn't change.

We have to trust the tech here imo. The offside player is the next person to play the ball following the touch from the player challenging GK which is the only questionable part of it for me, although I think the way the ball goes up in the air is consistent with glove to ball to Ecuador head

The overhead angle shows it best. I don't know where this image is from but it should have been broadcast during the match. Keeping the decision secret helped no one but conspiracy theorists.

Also, it would have been useful to include the goalkeeper in the fancy new offside animation so there's no debate about where the offside line is.

 

[cwyeary]

Here's an image showing it was the attacker and not the keeper that causes the ball to go up.

 

[JamesL]

There you have it then..technology working correct.
Now we need to get the fan experience right.

 

[one]

There you have it then..technology working correct.

Great to see it work well one game in a row.

 

[Mr Dean]

There you have it then..technology working correct.
Now we need to get the fan experience right.

The technology objectively worked "correct" but it didn't work well. Tech only works well if the fans know what is happening. In the MLS, the VAR would have had a look at the incident, saw no clear and obvious error, awarded the goal, and no one would have batted an eyelid. That is technology working both correctly and well.

 

[socal lurker]

The technology objectively worked "correct" but it didn't work well. Tech only works well if the fans know what is happening. In the MLS, the VAR would have had a look at the incident, saw no clear and obvious error, awarded the goal, and no one would have batted an eyelid. That is technology working both correctly and well.

It's going to be interesting to see how it plays out in other games. This was a really hard play. And while they use the accelerometer in the ball to determine moment of contact, this was a more subtle moment of contact, and I imagine the challenge was sorting out that it was an attacking touch and then matching which accelerometer change was the one matching to the attacking player. I suspect that ordinary OS calls are going to be much more crisp, and that this may be the longest OS delay of the tournament. (And imagine being the VAR on that one--you're three minutes into the opening game with a confusing OS call that is about to take off the first goal of the tournament--might slow things down a bit, too.)

But I do think this is a highlight of how VAR is changing the game. Without VAR (or in MLS that treats OS review as C&O review), the attacker was even and it was a good goal.