حكم OURVAR على قرار الحكم: خاطئ. أنت تصوّت على مدى صحة تحليل OURVAR — وليس على الحكم.
هل توافق على حكم OURVAR؟
كل تصويت يساعد على تحسين دقة OURVAR — ونحن ممتنون لذلك. الـ AI ليس معصومًا من الخطأ، وحكمك هو بالضبط ما يُطوّره، حالةً تلو الأخرى. أنت تساهم في بناء الـ VAR الذي نستحقه جميعًا. 🙏
Belgium scored a late equaliser against Senegal from a cross to force extra time, which they went on to win on a penalty. The goal should not have stood. Replays show the scorer using both hands to push two Senegal defenders apart while they were looking up at the ball — a clear, one-sided push, not the mutual jostling that is tolerated at set pieces. Pushing an opponent is a direct-free-kick offence, and when an attacking foul creates the goal, the goal must be disallowed. This is not a case of penalising every touch in a crowded box: the distinction is that the defenders were passive and ball-watching while the attacker actively shoved them to make his space. VAR checks every goal, so it either missed the push or wrongly judged it insufficient — a clear attacking foul in the immediate build-up is exactly what VAR exists to catch. WRONG DECISION, medium-high confidence. The one qualifier: it rests on the push being clear and one-sided and materially creating the chance, which the available frames support; if the defenders were also pushing, it would soften toward a scramble, but they are shown watching the ball, not wrestling.
سجّل لرؤية كل نقطة أساسية، وبنود قوانين IFAB المُستشهد بها، والتحليل لقطة بلقطة وراء هذا الحكم.
تحدَّ القرار. اسأل OURVAR "لماذا؟"، "ماذا عن زاوية المرفق؟"، "ما السابقة؟" — واحصل على إجابات مستندة إلى قوانين الـIFAB من النموذج نفسه الذي حلّل الحالة. Pro 25/شهر · WC 50 · GB 150.
النقاش