OURVAR judged the referee's decision: Correct. You're voting on whether OURVAR's analysis is right — not on the referee.
Do you agree with OURVAR's verdict?
Every vote helps sharpen OURVAR's accuracy — and we're grateful for it. The AI isn't infallible, and your verdict is exactly what improves it, case by case. You're helping build the VAR we all deserve. 🙏
Canada's #17 (BUCHANAN, readable on the shirt) received the ball in behind the Qatar defence and was running toward goal with no covering defender between him and the goalkeeper when a Qatar defender brought him down from behind. The referee initially gave a penalty and yellow card, but VAR reviewed the incident and correctly determined the foul occurred just outside the penalty area rather than inside it — so the restart was changed to a free kick. Crucially, the red card was maintained because the challenge met all four conditions for DOGSO (Denial of an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity): #17 was in on goal, heading toward it with the ball under control, and there was no covering defender to challenge him had the foul not been committed. The final decision — free kick outside the box plus red card — is fully correct under IFAB Laws.
Read the full OURVAR breakdown
Sign up to see every key factor, the IFAB law clauses cited, and the frame-by-frame reasoning that led to this verdict.
- Key factors that drove the AI's call
- Full IFAB law citations + frame references
- Vote, comment, and discuss with other fans
Ask OURVAR
Have a question about this verdict?
Push back on the verdict. Ask the AI 'why?', 'what about the elbow angle?', 'what's the precedent?' — and get IFAB-grounded answers from the same model that called the case. Pro 25/month · WC 50 · GB 150.
Discussion