OURVAR judged the referee's decision: Wrong. 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. 🙏
Egypt won the ball in Argentina's half and countered, unbroken, to score; VAR had the goal overturned for a light step on Lisandro Martínez's supporting foot at the start of the move. This is a wrong decision. The incident was reviewable and the contact was a real, if soft, foul — but a build-up foul is subjective, and VAR may overturn a goal only for a CLEAR AND OBVIOUS error. A marginal step of the kind ignored all match is not that; the on-field goal was defensible, so VAR should have left it. Being allowed to review is not a licence to re-referee a soft call. WRONG DECISION, medium confidence — the goal should stand.
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