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. 🙏
The assistant referee correctly identified Czech #22 (white) as being in offside position at the moment the ball was last played by a team-mate, and as active in the phase that produced the goal — interfering with play under Law 11.2. The flag was raised, the goal was disallowed, and play was restarted with an indirect free kick to South Korea from where the offence occurred. This is the textbook application of Law 11: position alone isn't an offence, but #22's involvement in the buildup converted his offside position into a punishable offence. On-field officiating + AR judgement were both correct.
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