Do you agree with OURVAR's verdict?
At 78:40, 0-0, Ghana #25 (Prince) broke through the middle on a counter and beat England #2 for position, pushing the ball ahead into the penalty area. The recovering England defender slid in from behind/the side and caught the attacker's legs before he could reach the ball, bringing him down inside the box. England's goalkeeper then arrived and collided — but with his own defender, not the attacker, so that contact is irrelevant to the foul. The on-field referee waved play on and VAR did not intervene. This is a clear missed penalty: under Law 12 a recovering defender who trips an attacker who has already won position is a careless tripping foul, and inside the penalty area (Law 14) that is a penalty kick. The attacker had beaten his man and was reaching for the ball — exactly the scenario the laws protect. WRONG NO-CALL, HIGH confidence.
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