O OURVAR julgou a decisão do árbitro: Correto. Você está votando se a análise do OURVAR está correta — não sobre o árbitro.
Você concorda com o veredicto do OURVAR?
Cada voto ajuda a aprimorar a precisão do OURVAR — e somos gratos por isso. A AI não é infalível, e o seu veredicto é exatamente o que a melhora, caso a caso. Você está ajudando a construir o VAR que todos merecemos. 🙏
Ghana equalised against Croatia at 1-1, and after the celebrations the assistant referee flagged for offside, sending the referee to the monitor for nearly four minutes. The goal was correctly given. The decision turns on the most misunderstood principle in Law 11: being in an offside position is NOT an offence. A player is only penalised if he is in an offside position AND becomes involved in active play — by touching the ball, by interfering with an opponent (blocking the goalkeeper's sight or movement, challenging a defender), or by gaining an advantage from a rebound. Here, two things make the goal valid: first, the player who actually scored was ONSIDE; second, Ghana's #8, who was in an offside position, did not touch the ball and did not interfere with any opponent. As the referee stated: "The attacker number 8 was in an offside position, but he did not interfere with play. Decision is goal for Ghana." An offside-positioned teammate who stays passive and out of the play does not invalidate a goal scored by an onside player. CORRECT DECISION, HIGH confidence — and the long check reflects the referee correctly verifying both the scorer's position and whether #8 became active.
Cadastre-se para ver cada ponto-chave, as cláusulas das Leis IFAB citadas e o raciocínio quadro a quadro que levou a este veredito.
Questione o veredito. Pergunte ao OURVAR "por quê?", "e o ângulo do cotovelo?", "qual o precedente?" — e receba respostas fundamentadas nas Leis da IFAB do mesmo modelo que analisou o lance. Pro 25/mês · WC 50 · GB 150.
Discussão