Angleterre vs RD Congo

Just before half-time, trailing DR Congo 1-0, England's Harry Kane went down under a challenge from the onrushing goalkeeper near the edge of the box. The referee instantly signalled a dive and gave no penalty; VAR checked and took no action. This is the correct decision. The principle is the one fans most often get wrong: contact does not equal a penalty. A goalkeeper committing to a slide is not fouling unless he misses the ball and brings the attacker down — and here the contact was minimal and Kane was already falling, so it does not rise to a foul. Two details support the call: the referee, well-placed, read it live as going down too easily; and although he signalled a dive he did not caution Kane, which is the honest middle ground — not enough for a penalty, but not clear-cut simulation either, usually meaning some light contact existed. VAR checking and taking no action confirms there was no clear and obvious error to correct. CORRECT DECISION, medium confidence — with the caveat that if a replay clearly showed the keeper missing the ball and clipping Kane's leg to cause the fall, it would flip to a penalty (and a DOGSO question, most likely a yellow rather than red as the keeper was attempting to play the ball in his own area). On the available angles, it does not.