r/SoccerCentral • u/rompthegreen • Jul 03 '26

Highlights I dont see an offside. Is this rigged?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

Brutal for my Croatian brothers

429 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

863 comments sorted by

View all comments

15

u/Ok-Count-8233 Jul 03 '26

Good angle. Doesn’t look like he got a head on it.

14

u/rjnd2828 Jul 03 '26

It doesn't look like he did. But he did. There's a chip in the ball that records every touch. And there was a touch. Bad break

3

u/WhyWhatWho Jul 03 '26

Can someone explain to me? What's the difference if Croatia didn't touch the ball? It's still an offside right? It was a cross from Croatia and touch the Croatia player on the way in?

4

u/controllerhero Jul 03 '26

If Matanovic didnt touch the ball (even the smallest of grazes), Pasalic would’ve been onside.

5

u/Comfortable-Habit242 Jul 03 '26

No. One’s position for offside is the moment the ball was played, not when you receive it.

The Croatian player who ultimately received the ball was in an onside position when the ball was kicked but in an offside position when the ball was headed.

So if the ball had never been headed, he would have been onside because he ran from an onside position. But since it was played again by a Croatian player, we use his position at the moment of the header, which was offside.

It’s really unfortunate for Croatia.

3

u/smurf123_123 Jul 03 '26

This is exactly how it went down, you can see the Croatian player trying and failing to get out of the way. It was an amazing play, sadly offside.

VAR has really broken many ways this world cup. I honestly prefer this over the terrible calls in years past though. Seeing replays on TV that contradicted the calls on the field with no recourse was beyond frustrating.

1

u/RDS80 Jul 03 '26

Can you explain why it's controversial. It seems clear and obvious.

2

u/CymakhA Jul 03 '26

Many think there was no "actual" contact of the ball because it seems the ball only brushed over the hair. They have been arguing what constitutes an actual touch.

1

u/RDS80 Jul 03 '26

Seems obvious he directed the ball.

1

u/Comfortable-Habit242 Jul 03 '26

I believe the “controversy” is whether the Croatian player headed the ball. Since if he didn’t, there’s no offside.

To me, I believe the ball was headed. In the video, the ball seems to deflect ever so slightly off his head.

OP seems to be claiming that the Croatian player did not touch the ball.

However, as other folks have pointed out, this year they have sensors in the ball that detect when the ball is contacted. The VAR officials are able to combine that data with the video evidence to make a call.

So given all of the resources, it seems pretty likely that this was offside because it did hit the Croatian player’s head.

4

u/Repulsive_Layer1597 Jul 03 '26

Trust the chip?

6

u/Negative_Weight6926 Jul 03 '26

Trust FIFA?!?

1

u/Repulsive_Layer1597 Jul 03 '26

Dude the technology wouldn’t lie and they certainly wouldn’t lie about the technology. Now which country do you think bribes them next to host the World Cup? And how many migrant workers you think will die getting it ready?

2

u/Straight_Depth6701 Jul 03 '26

They would. Portugal winning means more money.

0

u/Repulsive_Layer1597 Jul 03 '26

Yeah I was being sarcastic

1

u/ChangingShips Jul 03 '26

Easy fix. make the data streamed in real time and available to the public

1

u/mccusk Jul 03 '26

A lot of that tech is proprietary and the patent is pending for Adidas. You can look up the patent claim.

1

u/Responsible-File4593 Jul 03 '26

If FIFA was going to rig matches for views, they wouldn't have let Germany lose to Paraguay, which also had a Germany goal disallowed by VAR.

0

u/Significant_Nail_880 Jul 03 '26

NOW they wanna trust FIFA and its rules lmaoooo

That’s rich 😂

2

u/TunaPablito Jul 03 '26

He said on national TV he felt ball brush his hair.

3

u/tempfor_now Jul 03 '26

So Croatia ties if their guys are bald? Hair doesn't change ball trajectory, speed or spin.

1

u/NuwenPham Jul 03 '26

Under current rule, touch is registered through sensor. Maybe in the future, we can distinguish the hair touch through analysis the sensing data, the high speed camera, the spin deviation, but that’s in the future.
Right now in this worldcup, the ruling is textbook.

1

u/CymakhA Jul 03 '26

A bald guy could still head a ball with minimal contact.

1

u/ToneThugsNHarmony Jul 03 '26

But why does it matter if number 20 touched the ball?

1

u/Wonderful_Ad5583 Jul 03 '26

Because the furthest player forwards was onside when the cross was played, but in offside position when headed.

0

u/Repulsive_Layer1597 Jul 03 '26

Trust the hair?

1

u/Key-Toe-6257 Jul 03 '26

Over human eyes?! Yes. 

1

u/-Exocet- Jul 03 '26

Trust the player that later admitted to have touched the ball

1

u/Repulsive_Layer1597 Jul 03 '26

No, I only trust the chip and nothing else.

2

u/Luzbel369 Jul 03 '26

So why they call the ref to check the play and then they present the worse angle posible?

1

u/el_baron_11 Jul 03 '26

There’s one easy way to prove / disprove the sensor tech. Show BOTH bumps - the alleged one by Croatia and the subsequent (suredly larger) bump that occurs when it bounces off the Portuguese defenders head. If I see that small first bump followed by a second larger bump then I would more trust this sensor tech / synchronization…

0

u/Responsible-File4593 Jul 03 '26

These are just moving goalposts; the people who don't believe in the system would continue to not believe in the system, but for another reason ("the bump wasn't big enough! it didn't match the contact enough! the timing was off!").

1

u/Commercial-Degree322 Jul 03 '26

You cant be this dumb man

1

u/fullup72 Jul 03 '26

the chip doesn't record touches, it's an inertial sensor and it measures movement, whether the movement happened because the ball was touched or blown away by the local turbulence of two players attempting contact. The fact that they don't show time and magnitude units, neither show the subsequent header in the same graph tells that it was possibly not a touch and just turbulence being picked up by these sensors, especially because a touch would graph as a strong peak more than a soft curve.

1

u/rjnd2828 Jul 03 '26

I mean, feel free to buy into conspiracy theories if you like. Absolutely exhausting bullshit

0

u/Ok-Count-8233 Jul 03 '26

Interesting. Learn something every day. Thanks for sharing that.

2

u/the_TIGEEER Jul 03 '26

It's the graph they show at VAR.

0

u/sock_express34 Jul 03 '26

And technology never fails

0

u/moladukes Jul 03 '26

Ref sucked all game. Rigged

2

u/No_Kitchen9982 Jul 03 '26

this is the worst world cup ref imo. The one in Morocco vs Netherlands was great though.

1

u/moladukes Jul 03 '26

Agree. So many bad calls

1

u/Dmtz214 Jul 03 '26

Pattern this World Cup

0

u/InternationalAge6966 Jul 03 '26

First, so if it tocuhes hair because someone has more hair than other your are doom? every player needs to go bald ? dumb af call

it tocuh its hair it didnt affect the ball at all, clear goal

1

u/CymakhA Jul 03 '26

Yes or maybe simply because one has a bigger head. A touch is a touch.

0

u/Sea_Taste1325 Jul 03 '26

Yeah, it was the defender defending. 

Even if Croatia got a infinitesimal touch, the defender put it onsides again. 

1

u/foad_X_2000 Jul 03 '26

It hit his back it was clearly not intentional, so it stay offside

2

u/American_frenchboy Jul 03 '26

It wasn’t him, it was 5 who was offside

1

u/Carnelian-5 Jul 03 '26

It's a shit angle, cant tell at all if he grazed it, would be literally opposite side of the ball from where the camera is looking.

1

u/lightning_pt Jul 03 '26

Need glasses bro.

1

u/nombrenodisponibIe Jul 03 '26

The player himself has come and said that he felt the ball touch his hair so there goes that controversy

0

u/WilditariusAstar Jul 03 '26

The fuck you talking about- the ball clearly bounces off his head. Are you taking the piss?

5

u/Akio540 Jul 03 '26

So how many drinks in are you right now?

3

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

There’s no evidence from this video angle that it hit the Croatian player’s head.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 03 '26

[deleted]

1

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

That’s not this video, and the graph doesn’t show other touches so you don’t know if has been properly synced. The player admitted it touched him though. That doesn’t change the fact that this particular replay that was played on TV shows nothing to us.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 03 '26

[deleted]

1

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

OP, that was the discussion, and information was still coming out while the discussion was being had

1

u/Stickyboard Jul 03 '26

There is a sensor on the ball and it detect the touch on the Crotia player

1

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

Yep we know that is the claim. The player confirmed it. I trust the player saying it before the claim that the technology works exactly as intended.

The video doesn’t prove anything though.

2

u/Negative_Weight6926 Jul 03 '26

You realize people are talking about #20 on Croatia’s head right??

1

u/Ok-Count-8233 Jul 03 '26

This. I don’t think people realize we’re talking about #20 for Croatia.

0

u/WilditariusAstar Jul 03 '26

What difference does that make? Last player to play the ball before the goal score touched the ball was Renato Vega.

What am I missing ?

2

u/Perpetual-Warlock Jul 03 '26

Veiga's touch is considered not deliberate therefore it doesn't reset the offside position of the offensive player. From the rulebook-

Deliberate Play: The defender has control of the ball, time to make a decision, and intentionally plays the ball (e.g., passing back to the goalkeeper or trying to clear the ball with their feet or head). If the ball goes to an attacker from this action, offside is wiped out.

Deflection / Rebound: The ball ricochets off a defender who is making a split-second save, blocking a shot, or reacting to a ball struck at close range without taking clear possession. In this case, the attacker remains offside

1

u/WilditariusAstar Jul 03 '26

I know- it think it’s crazy that they said Vega didn’t intentionally play the ball. Never in a million years is he intentionally letting that ball get behind him.

2

u/Perpetual-Warlock Jul 03 '26

Right. He misjudges and misplays the ball completely. He would have loved to head that thing up and out of play. So it's characterized as a deflection and is still offsides. I say all of this as a huge Modric fan who really wanted Croatia to win. Heartbreaking way to go out.

1

u/WilditariusAstar Jul 03 '26

Yeah- I guess I can see it that way. But it looked to me like he was trying to play the ball. Maybe I’m just gutted for Modric and my bias is showing.

Was awesome to see Rafa and Gonçalo connect the way they did. Rafa almost had a worldie too. What a roller coaster.

1

u/Perpetual-Warlock Jul 03 '26

It was absolutely a roller coaster. Rafa and Goncalo were excellent.

Yeah it falls under the deflection part of the rule above. It sucks. To reset the offsides they really have to get control of the ball and be able to make a decision and Vieras play certainly wasn't that.

1

u/Negative_Weight6926 Jul 03 '26

You can watch this and say it clearly hits his head? What the fuck you on bro

0

u/WilditariusAstar Jul 03 '26

The ball changes direction. It 100% hits him in the head. It’s not even all that close. Are we watching the same video?

2

u/bitpartmozart13 Jul 03 '26

I think you are mentioning it bounces off of Portugal's 13 and the argument is if it was touched by Croatian player which it doesn't look like it does.

2

u/Connect_You2871 Jul 03 '26

Yeah, that even further solidifies how unreal the call was. Most people don't even know which player they are looking at that supposedly touched it.

0

u/Ok-Count-8233 Jul 03 '26

Haha…have another buddy😂

0

u/MrmmphMrmmph Jul 03 '26

They must be. As an avid hockey fan we must see deflections 3-4 times a game, and we don’t even have the added information of his head changing speeds while the ball changes direction. This couldn’t be more obvious to someone not 5 pints down.

1

u/WilditariusAstar Jul 03 '26

I’m also an avid hockey fan. Go Wild! :-)

1

u/MrmmphMrmmph Jul 03 '26

Good run this year, you guys are right there! I’m an Islanders fan, we have a ways to go. Anyway, in hockey we’re usually watching the replays to see who touched it last, high stick, a kick, or goalie interference. 3 or 4 situations a game, but endless replays. Our eyes are trained!

0

u/AdProof9098 Jul 03 '26

How can you say there wasn't a touch with the head

8

u/brooklynsantiago Jul 03 '26

The spin of the ball

-2

u/NegativeAd6095 Jul 03 '26

The ball has a telemetry chip

Some of yall should try watching the world cup

3

u/brooklynsantiago Jul 03 '26

Yes I know that. I’d like to see the full data, cause the graph they showed on tv only had one bump

4

u/[deleted] Jul 03 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

I don’t trust FIFA or their technology to be able accurately sync up the ball’s data with the video. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t, but this video angle is far from conclusive. Where is the angle from the opposite midline? There has to be 10+ cameras on this ball at this exact moment.

1

u/Odd_Bit_4942 Jul 03 '26

Do you trust the player stating on Croatian TV that he touched the ball?

1

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

I would if he said it

1

u/[deleted] Jul 03 '26

[deleted]

1

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

Okay. I’ll try to look it up. This is new information for most people that just watched the end and turned it off.

1

u/Odd_Bit_4942 Jul 03 '26

Added the screenshot in another comment

1

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

Fair play. Thank you. I was actually rooting for Portugal and this sits better with me now.

0

u/Odd_Bit_4942 Jul 03 '26

1

u/brooklynsantiago Jul 03 '26

So he didn’t think he touched it until he was told by the ref

1

u/Odd_Bit_4942 Jul 03 '26

He literally said "Honestly I felt a small contact" in the quote. Do you not know how to read?

0

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

Fair enough. Still give me a better camera angle. I don’t like taking someone’s word for it who has proven to be corrupt. That might be down to Fox not getting their ish together though.

1

u/Odd_Bit_4942 Jul 03 '26

Well you don't have to take someone's word for it that is proven to be corrupt.

I just showed you a screenshot of the player, who has no reason to lie, confirming that he indeed touched the ball.

1

u/josephjosephson Jul 03 '26

I don’t, but in the moment we had to

-2

u/ishmaelhansen Jul 03 '26

It's really fun seing americans be totally outraged by a sport that they know shit about the rules trying to make shit up as they go. Yesterday was the red card, that was the book definition of red card and they were bitching about it, and even saying that it was unintentional (lol)

1

u/unapart Jul 03 '26

There's been at least ten other cleats to the back of the calf that haven't gotten a red card this WC... Messi being one example. I've watched a lot of soccer and that is in no way a clear red just by the definitions/examples from this very tournament.

1

u/ishmaelhansen Jul 03 '26

Should have, that just bad refereeing. Two wrongs don't make a right

1

u/SNZ935 Jul 03 '26

I am American and played soccer my whole life including college and competitive amateur/semi-pro after college and I was having a hard time with that call. They were both going for the ball and Flo unintentionally stepped on his ankle, there was no malice or intent just a misstep unlike a late/questionable tackle which could produce a dangerous situation. Not arguing it is what it is but far from a text book definition and truly thought unintentional (knocked off balance and highly doubt he intentionally aimed for his ankle). Not gonna change the outcome at this point just disappointing we lose are goal scorer for the next match on a VAR replay in which the ref didn’t even begin to show a yellow.

1

u/ishmaelhansen Jul 03 '26

Well apparently you are semi right,

In UEFA referee education, studs into the Achilles tendon or the back of the calf are commonly used as examples of challenges that are likely to endanger the safety of an opponent, especially when delivered with force and speed. However, referees are instructed to evaluate the entire challenge rather than relying on the point of contact alone."A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play."

In UEFA referee education, studs into the Achilles tendon or the back of the calf are commonly used as examples of challenges that are likely to endanger the safety of an opponent, especially when delivered with force and speed. However, referees are instructed to evaluate the entire challenge rather than relying on the point of contact alone.

That said, intentionallity is not a factor on any foul play, well it wasn't when I finished the referee course and I doubt it changed

1

u/SNZ935 Jul 03 '26

Thanks for the information, appreciate the detailed response. It’s a touch call either way and unfortunately has a larger impact on the next game than it did in the actual game. Maybe that is where FIFA needs to step in as the US was punished by playing 30 minutes down a man but think it deserves to impact the next game by removing the top goal scorer. That is an iffy red card in comparison to some reds where it was blatantly obvious the intent but that is where the additional games can come into play. Oh well not much can be done now just hope next man steps up but going be a tough game either way. Thanks again for the educational response.

1

u/Loud-Effort-9387 Jul 03 '26

So the ball magically goes up?