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. 🙏
In the build-up to a Germany goal against Ecuador, a German player raised his foot high to reach a high ball, and an Ecuador defender challenging him made slight contact with the boot near his head. Ecuador appealed for dangerous play. The on-field referee allowed the goal and VAR confirmed it. Under Law 12, playing in a dangerous manner (a high foot near an opponent's head) is only an offence when it endangers an opponent who is playing safely — it is NOT an offence when the opponent creates the danger himself by moving into a legitimate attempt to play the ball. Here the German player was genuinely playing a high ball, the contact was slight rather than a forceful strike, and the motion into the boot was made by the Ecuador player. There is therefore no dangerous-play foul by the attacking team, nothing for VAR to overturn, and the goal correctly stands. CORRECT DECISION, 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