We’re analyzing every VAR decision made across all 64 games in the 2022 World Cup.
After each game, we take a look at key incidents to examine and explain the process in terms of both VAR protocol and the Laws of the Game.
Total Reversal: 4
Flip Rejected: 0
Leading to goals: 2
Leading to rejected goals: 2
Penalized: 2 (0 missed)
~ for holding: 2
Goal disallowed for offside: 2
VAR overturn: penalty for foul by Abdulhamid on Paredes
VAR Decision: penalty, scored by Lionel Messi,
VAR Review: FIFA stated before the tournament that penalties would be imposed on a more regular basis for pushing inside the penalty area, but decided to award spot kicks. Argentina For Saud Abdulhamid holding back leandro paredes Seemed to be another soft decision. This doesn’t really fit the mantra that VAR should be “minimum intervention for maximum benefit”.
This brings us back to the second incident in England’s game against Iran, when Harry Maguire missed a penalty. The main difference was that the England defender also had his arm around Rozbeh Chesmi, which is why VAR didn’t kick in. In the case of Saudi Arabia, Abdulhamid had the sole holding.
It is difficult for fans to understand how these incidents can be treated differently when there is no VAR audio to give any explanation or clarity. But if this is the baseline, then this World Cup is going to see a lot of VAR penalties.
VAR reversed: offside against Martinez
What happened: Lautaro Martinez Scored the second goal for Argentina in the 27th minute, or so he thought.
VAR Decision: No goal, offside.
VAR Review: with FIFA’s semi-automatic offside technology Due to faster and more accurate decision-making, it did not take long for Martinez’s goal to be disallowed. The Argentine striker was leaning against the last defender, which was not noticed by the assistant referee.
It was tight, but players were able to play the ball and score with their upper arm, so disallowing the goal was correct.
Two other Argentine goals in the first half were disallowed for offside, one against Martínez and one for Messi which were correctly marked by the assistant.
VAR overturn: Pourliganji fined for stone pelting
What happened: In the 10th minute of extra time, Iran A free kick was awarded, which swung into the area but came to nothing. But on VAR, Uruguayan referee Leodan Gonzalez was reviewing a possible penalty.
VAR Decision: penalty, scored by Mehdi Teremi,
VAR Review: This is the kind of decision that fans really dislike with VAR making what appears to be an inconsequential incident – especially when a more obvious incident earlier in the game didn’t lead to VAR intervention.
When a free kick is played in the penalty area, Murtaza Pourliganji went to challenge for the ball but his shirt was pulled John Stones, It was a minor stretch and it is questionable whether the Iran defender had any effect.
So, what’s the difference for VAR? More importantly, Maguire also had his arm around Chesmee, which would also be noted by VAR as a holding offense by both players. It was important.
Another consideration may be whether an attacking player can be prevented from challenging for the ball; Ergo, would he have had a chance to play the ball without the challenge? This is not the only factor, and it seems that FIFA is placing less importance on this aspect, but VAR can take it into account.
In Maguire’s case, it was deemed that the ball was not within immediate play distance, despite Chesmee stopping the offense. So england The player was not barred from competing for the ball.
As with Poraliganji, the ball was passed close to him, which meant that Stones’ shirt pull was considered to prevent an opponent from challenging for the ball.
Match referee Rafael Kloss took a long, hard look at the incident on the monitors and decided to go by VAR’s advice. No one would like to see such minor breaches being penalized throughout the tournament. Is it really clear and obvious?
Rob Dawson of ESPN FC has tipped England to win big in their World Cup opener against Iran.
VAR reversal: Valencia goal disallowed for offside
What happened: Ecuador thought they had taken the lead against hosts Qatar in the third minute Ener ValenciaBut there was a lengthy review for offside.
VAR Decision: Target not allowed.
VAR Review: It was the right decision, although it wasn’t exactly obvious to fans and the 3D visualization took a long time to show up.
When a free kick is played in the area, Ecuador Protector Felix Torres Challenge: Queue goalkeeper saad al-sheeb, the ball fell Michael Estradawho took him back to Torres to score the goal for Valencia.
However, when Torres got a touch on the ball (the direction in which it travels, forwards or backwards, is irrelevant) Estrada had a foot ahead of the second-last defensive player, who was abdelkarim hassan,
The review took longer than a regular offside check because the offside VAR, Tomasz Listkiewicz, had to be certain the ball had come off Torres. Without him, Estrada would not have been offside.
Al-Sheeb’s touch before the ball comes off Torres’ head is of no relevance to the offside decision – the stage for every other player’s offside position is determined by the touch by Torres. It is also irrelevant whether the attacking player means to play the ball the way he has it.
Additional confusion ensued with Estrada being obscured by Torres and Al-Sheeb, and another defender close to the goal. Fans naturally look for the last defender, which can be confusing when the goalkeeper is ahead. There must be two opposition players between the attacker and the goal, usually the goalkeeper and a defender. In this situation, only one defender was ahead of Estrada; Al-Sheeb wasn’t even the second-last defensive player in this case, it was Hassan (who was also blocked from seeing by Torres and Al-Sheeb.)
It was actually a very simple and clear offside decision after the touch from Torres was confirmed, Estrada was clearly ahead of Hasan, but there was a lack of clarity on this for too long. also with FIFA’s semi-automatic offside technologyThe time taken to provide clarity to the fans should be improved.