FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022

[Armagh18]

I can now start to enjoy this world cup and get on with cheering for Morocco. A Morocco win would be a sensation.

Morocco or Croatia would be great. Don't like the Argentinians but Messi deserves one

[quit yo jibbajabba]

Never watched it, Xmas do at Europa, just reading the thread like it was live!!

So the Frogs bate the Brits, possibly a showdown with the Argies in the final but hopefully the Croats and the knife wielding Moroccans disrupt the big hitters and make it a entertaining final!

Some boy from page or two back says we're not allowed to say Argies and youd need to check if Brits and Frogs is acceptable 😉😃

[AustinPowers]

Never watched it, Xmas do at Europa, just reading the thread like it was live!!

So the Frogs bate the Brits, possibly a showdown with the Argies in the final but hopefully the Croats and the knife wielding Moroccans disrupt the big hitters and make it a entertaining final!

Some boy from page or two back says we're not allowed to say Argies and youd need to check if Brits and Frogs is acceptable 😉😃

But knife wielding Moroccans  is fine, presumably? 

[Milltown Row2]

I presumed it's ok as everyone was happy with those derogatory terms, my bad 

[Saffrongael]

In relation to the first penalty England didn't get from VAR for the alleged trip on Harry Kane. Could VAR have given a free kick for the foul being outside the area? Or is it a penalty or nothing and VAR decided it wasn't a foul?

VAR can't give a foul in that instance, it's a penalty check, so penalty or nothing

[Itchy]

I hope you didn't shit in your union jack boxers last night Miltown.

[David McKeown]

In relation to the first penalty England didn't get from VAR for the alleged trip on Harry Kane. Could VAR have given a free kick for the foul being outside the area? Or is it a penalty or nothing and VAR decided it wasn't a foul?

It was definitely in the box but VAR said no foul.

Where did you see that confirmation?

I haven't seen any confirmation but based on the available angles I think it is more likely that the decided that it definitely was a foul but that it was not clearly and obviously in the penalty area.

I was about to say that's not how VAR works but given that they haven't even coming close to following the rules on how VAR works in this tournament who knows.

My understanding of what is supposed to happen is:

As whether it was inside or outside is a matter fact, clear and obvious doesn't come into it.  As whether it was a foul or not is a matter of opinion they can only interfere if they feel the referee has made a clear and obvious error.  This is supposed to ensure consistency by having the onfield referee make the decisions.

The bit that gets me about that approach though is to know why the ref has made a decision is essential in order to know if he's made a clear and obvious error.  For example if he doesn't give a handball because he felt it didn't hit a hand then it might be clear and obvious on replay it did and he should be asked to relook at it to check if its intentional but if he doesn't give it because he thinks it did hit the hand but wasn't intentional then VAR probably shouldn't get involved certainly not as quickly.

This is compounded by what happens if VAR asks the ref why he made his decision because if VAR then has to intervene and ask him to look at the monitor VAR has to be saying, i know why you made that decision but you have made a clear and obvious error please reconsider it.  Very few refs are going to change their minds in that circumstance and all of sudden you effectively have the VAR official making the decision and not the onfield referee.

Have FIFA yet explained why they didn't interfere on either the Kane incident or the Bellingham incident in the second half?  I would be interested to know how they approached those.

Anyway even before its introduction I have long said, I hate VAR

[seafoid]

France slight favourites


https://www.oddschecker.com/football/world-cup

[smelmoth]

In relation to the first penalty England didn't get from VAR for the alleged trip on Harry Kane. Could VAR have given a free kick for the foul being outside the area? Or is it a penalty or nothing and VAR decided it wasn't a foul?

It was definitely in the box but VAR said no foul.

Where did you see that confirmation?

I haven't seen any confirmation but based on the available angles I think it is more likely that the decided that it definitely was a foul but that it was not clearly and obviously in the penalty area.

I was about to say that's not how VAR works but given that they haven't even coming close to following the rules on how VAR works in this tournament who knows.

My understanding of what is supposed to happen is:

As whether it was inside or outside is a matter fact, clear and obvious doesn't come into it.  As whether it was a foul or not is a matter of opinion they can only interfere if they feel the referee has made a clear and obvious error.  This is supposed to ensure consistency by having the onfield referee make the decisions.

The bit that gets me about that approach though is to know why the ref has made a decision is essential in order to know if he's made a clear and obvious error.  For example if he doesn't give a handball because he felt it didn't hit a hand then it might be clear and obvious on replay it did and he should be asked to relook at it to check if its intentional but if he doesn't give it because he thinks it did hit the hand but wasn't intentional then VAR probably shouldn't get involved certainly not as quickly.

This is compounded by what happens if VAR asks the ref why he made his decision because if VAR then has to intervene and ask him to look at the monitor VAR has to be saying, i know why you made that decision but you have made a clear and obvious error please reconsider it.  Very few refs are going to change their minds in that circumstance and all of sudden you effectively have the VAR official making the decision and not the onfield referee.

Have FIFA yet explained why they didn't interfere on either the Kane incident or the Bellingham incident in the second half?  I would be interested to know how they approached those.

Anyway even before its introduction I have long said, I hate VAR

The obvious question then is, as a matter of fact was it inside or outside the penalty area?

[Saffrongael]

Jamie Carragher just said it was outside the box

[Armamike]

England need to find a few more commanding figures at the back if they're going to ever win a trophy.  Just lack the bit of grit that's needed to win stuff. 

Would think France are the best equipped to win it now - they have the creativity and know how to do get a result.  But who knows.

[Milltown Row2]

I hope you didn't shit in your union jack boxers last night Miltown.

Was touch and go but I think the sheets at the Europa were fine! I stayed off the Guinness

[Itchy]

England need to find a few more commanding figures at the back if they're going to ever win a trophy.  Just lack the bit of grit that's needed to win stuff. 

Would think France are the best equipped to win it now - they have the creativity and know how to do get a result.  But who knows.

Englands problem is one of a losing culture in terms of playing the big teams. France were really poor for much of the game but still got over the line. England should have had enough to win it but found a way to lose. Not sure will more players change a cultural issue - thankfully

[AustinPowers]

Just read an interesting fact onlin.  Here's what teams  England have beaten in the  last 5 world cups

Senegal, Wales,  Iran , Sweden, Colombia (on penalties) , Panama, Tunisia,  Slovenia, Paraguay,  Trinidad and Tobago

They have failed to beat the likes of  France Germany Italy Belgium  Croatia  Portugal Brazil etc when it really mattered

To put things in perspective, Morocco have already beat Belgium Spain and Portugal at this World Cup alone

[Milltown Row2]

But they beat The Germans when it mattered lol 66