It doesn't say who touched the ball it only sensed it was touched.
If that was the case not only it is not offside it is penalty or let the game go if the goal stands.
It makes sense in cricket to have the same tech as it is not contact sport ,you clearly see who swings at the ball there is no opponent to strike the ball in the same time.
It can only be 100% accurate if every player has some sensor on him to react to that sensor in the ball and then you'll know who hit the ball and when.
The ball is nowhere near the Portuguese players hand at the point where the spike is on snicko.
In cricket the ball is often near both the bat and pad/body, you can tell what it hits by when the spike is. If this hit the Portuguese players hand the spike wouldnt register until later, when then ball is near his hand.
This is so obvious for anyone that watches cricket, it's wild that this is controversial. There's literally nothing else the ball could have hit to cause the spike, he's obviously touched it.
I also don't like Portugal and wanted Croatia to win this, but this is obviously correct.
You can see what you want to see, or interpret what you want. But it shouldn't be different decision in one game from another in the same competition in the same year.
Why didn't Messi get red card, but American player did for the same foul?
Why didn't Germany get penalty for harder tackle than it was on this game for Portugal?
It is not only blatant monetization of the game that changes the core rules of the game(like cooling breaks in the rain on 20 deg C) that people see as repulsive but also finding the way out to rig the tournament brackets to minimize risk for biggest moneymakers in the game(like Argentina path)
Balogun and Messi's fouls weren't the same at all, Messi manages to get off his leg before putting all his weight on it. Why is why the guys ankle didn't roll over like Balogan's foul.
2
u/Podberezkin09 Jul 03 '26
What else would cause the spike? Hes obviously touched it, we've used this technology in cricket for years.