Croatia relegated after disputed verdict: Expert considers the decision unreasonable

Croatia thought they had tied the match in the 13th minute of added time in the second period, but If Guardioli scored goal was disallowed for offside.

In the situation before the goal Mario Pasalic was in an offside position when the ball was found to have hit Croatia Igor Matanoviciin.

The contact could not be seen with the naked eye, but according to the inertia meter of the World Cup ball, Matanovic hit the ball. The ball seemed to hit the Croatian in the hair.

Referee expert Jan-Peter Aravirran in my opinion, it seems “unreasonable” that a small touch to the hair is counted as a touch.

“It seems unreasonable that the ball is counted as touched, even though its trajectory or spin does not change,” says Aravirta.

“But these World Cup balls have a sensor that detects when the ball is touched. And this time it sounded the alarm. The ball must have hit Croatia’s Matanovic’s hair.”

In the situation Croatia’s concentration flew towards the penalty area. At that point, Pasalic, who got to the ball, was not offside. Matanovic jumped towards the ball. After that, the ball ended up in Portugal Renato Veigan through the back to Pasalic, who was in an offside position, who freed Guardioli to score.

However, Aravirta does not say that the goal was disallowed on the wrong grounds. According to him, it is hard to argue with the technology when the sensor detected the touch.

“Technology has been brought to football. It is difficult for such an old referee to argue with it. If the technology says that there has been contact, then there has been.”

“But yes it is [tuomio] it still feels bad when the flight path or something else doesn’t change when you touch it. As a referee, I have often wondered if it is a touch if the ball hits the hair. It seems unreasonable.”

According to Aravirta, the inertia meter inside the ball gives clarity to the situation. Too much openness to interpretation would make the judge’s work even more difficult.

“It’s clearer for everyone when a touch has been found with the help of technology, and we go with it. Maybe in the end games it’s also easier to understand this way than if there was room for interpretation.”

Ball hit Portugal’s Veiga last before Pasalic, but the goal was still disallowed. Veiga’s touch was considered a fluke rather than a deliberate play.

“The Portuguese player should have deliberately played the ball in order for the offside to be overturned. That is, he should somehow be able to control the ball. Now the ball came as a surprise,” and he was unable to control it.

“In this situation, the offside will remain in effect.”

The long video review seen at the end was related to Veiga’s touch.

According to Aravirta, the Croatian player’s touch was no longer examined, as the sensor had confirmed it. The referee was called to check on the video if Veiga played the ball on purpose.

The end result was a disallowed goal, and Portugal marched on in the World Cup. It next faces Spain in the quarterfinals on Monday night.