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. 🙏
The referee gave a red card for a serious foul play offense, but the analysis suggests a yellow card would have been the right call. Both players were moving fast toward the ball and collided heavily with their bodies and shoulders, which brought the opponent down hard—that's definitely a foul that deserves a yellow card for reckless play. However, there's no clear evidence of the most dangerous types of challenges (like studs-first contact to the leg, a two-footed lunge, or a raised foot) that would warrant a straight red card, so the ref appears to have over-punished the offense.
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