OURVAR judged the referee's decision: Correct. 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. 🙏
A Spanish player smashed the ball into Belgium defender Ngoy from point-blank range and it struck his arm; no handball was given. This is a correct no-call. Handball is judged by the arm's position at the moment of contact, and with the arm held close to the body — not making him unnaturally bigger — and no time to react to a ball kicked from a metre away, there is no offence. It does not matter that the arm may have been wider an instant earlier; the contact frame is what counts. CORRECT NO-CALL, medium confidence — it flips to a punishable handball only if the decisive frame shows the arm still extended away from the body at the actual moment of impact.
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