1 / 3 today
⚖ VAR Verdict · Case #57

Remo vs Athletico Paranaense

Brasileirão Série A · 2025/2026 · 2026-05-24 · 1-2

Wrong (No Call) medium confidence
Penalty (push/hold in box)
🗳️ Community verdict — vote now 4 votes needed for verdict

OURVAR judged the referee's decision: Wrong (No Call). 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. 🙏

Incident
Penalty (push/hold in box)
Law cited
Law 12 — Careless charge/push
Recommended action
Penalty kick to Remo
Affected team
On-field decision
Play on (no penalty)
🎬 Spot another clip we missed? Suggest it — we review every submission.
Suggest a clip →

The referee should have awarded a penalty kick to Remo but didn't. A defending player pushed the Remo attacker with an outstretched arm rather than using a proper shoulder-to-shoulder challenge, causing the attacker to lose balance and fall away from the ball inside the penalty area. While the defender was trying to win the ball, the way the contact was made—with the arm extended outward—was careless enough to warrant a penalty under football's rules.

🔒 Premium

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.

Ask OURVAR

🔒 PREMIUM

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

You're posting as a guest — one comment per discussion. Sign in to post more and comment under your name: Sign up free →