Today's World Cup Games

[RicoS321]

27 minutes ago, wee toon red said:

It's all about opinions but it wasn't a tackle situation, neither player had the ball. I don't see what the South Africa player was trying to achieve by sticking his arm across the defender and there are a couple of replays where you could make an argument that he did swing his hand at his face.

Exactly, you're making my point for me. You can make an argument for almost all contact if you choose to. It just shouldn't be anywhere near the threshold for VAR to get involved and it certainly wasn't the type of challenge that those idiots that insisted we need video replays were talking about when VAR was introduced. There was another challenge earlier in the game where there was a clash of knees and the South African player also hit the opponent in the face. You could make an argument for a red for that one too. Because you can make an argument for anything really.

In response to your other point, the player was trying to get to the ball and the Mexican was deliberately obstructing him. In order to get beyond the player, his hand had to be involved in some manner. He was clearly looking at the ball, and it wasn't some frustrated swipe. That, of course, is my opinion, but there is a fact here, and that's that VAR cannot confirm whether you or I am right in this instance, and it is exactly those type of subjective instances where it has no right being involved. We should never be saying the phrase "you could make an argument" when talking about VAR decisions. That was its point. 

[wee toon red]

I'd get VAR just as far into the sea than you would, believe me. But modern fitba is modern fitba and if you put your hand in someone's face, you're potentially in bother. Of course it's a load of pish, but it's the load of pish that fitba currently presents us with so under those circumstances, it's liable to be a red. Just because you and I don't like it doesn't meant it isn't.

[RicoS321]

12 minutes ago, wee toon red said:

I'd get VAR just as far into the sea than you would, believe me. But modern fitba is modern fitba and if you put your hand in someone's face, you're potentially in bother. Of course it's a load of pish, but it's the load of pish that fitba currently presents us with so under those circumstances, it's liable to be a red. Just because you and I don't like it doesn't meant it isn't.

Yes, we could say that about every decision ever! The frustrating thing here is that it sounds like you (not necessarily you, actually, but I've heard plenty suggesting it) are blaming the player. His arm was in a perfectly legitimate position for what he was trying to do. It wasn't stupid, naive, or any of the other accusations that get thrown in situations like these (similar to a hand being in a natural position that is deemed unnatural), it was just unlucky that VAR folk chose to interpret this particular incident in the way that they did. He's missing out on a world cup because of the toss of a coin. 

[wee toon red]

I am actually blaming the player - to an extent. Much like a defender who dangles his leg in the direction of an attacker in the box is at risk of the attacker running into that leg and going down, sticking your arm in the direction of a players face exposes you to the risk of action being taken. It's shite, and is ruining the game as *we* know it, but that's how it is. He didn't have to try and wrestle his way past the defender, he should've run into him and went down himself to try and get a free kick. Shite, but that's "fitba" in 2026. I repeat, shite.

[swaddon]

Tonight's World Cup games are Canada v Bosnia & Herzegovina (8 pm) and USA v Paraguay (2 am).

I don't know much about Canada and Bosnia, so I reckon that's a draw. Donald will have had a word in his mate Gianni's shell-like, and so USA will win. Expect dodgy VAR calls, random red cards and all round swicking.