OURVAR ha giudicato la decisione dell'arbitro: Corretto. Stai votando se l'analisi di OURVAR Γ¨ corretta β non sull'arbitro.
Sei d'accordo con il verdetto di OURVAR?
Ogni voto aiuta ad affinare la precisione di OURVAR β e te ne siamo grati. L'AI non Γ¨ infallibile, e il tuo giudizio Γ¨ esattamente ciΓ² che la migliora, caso per caso. Stai contribuendo a costruire il VAR che tutti meritiamo. π
The referee initially awarded Belgium a penalty for handball against New Zealand, but VAR recommended a review and the referee overturned it on the monitor, ruling the defender's arm was in a natural position. The final decision is correct. Under Law 12, a defender's accidental handball is a penalty only if the arm made the body "unnaturally bigger" or the act was deliberate. The defender was lunging to block with his arm out as a natural part of that motion β not extended beyond what the action required β and the shot was struck from close range, leaving minimal reaction time, which Law 12 treats as mitigation. So there was no punishable handball, and the original award was a clear-and-obvious error β the standard required for VAR to rescind a penalty already given. The referee confirming the overturn on his own monitor review is a strong endorsement of the no-handball conclusion. CORRECT DECISION, MEDIUM confidence β handball remains the most subjective area and VAR overturning a subjective call is only proper when the original is clearly wrong, which the close-range/natural-arm factors here support.
Iscriviti per vedere ogni punto chiave, le clausole IFAB citate e il ragionamento fotogramma per fotogramma dietro questo verdetto.
Metti in discussione il verdetto. Chiedi all'OURVAR "perchΓ©?", "e l'angolo del gomito?", "qual Γ¨ il precedente?" β e ricevi risposte basate sulle Regole IFAB dallo stesso modello che ha analizzato il caso. Pro 25/mese Β· WC 50 Β· GB 150.
Discussione