@jeffbarrow81@rohino@AbsoluteBruno They didn’t show it but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist and also, that wasn’t a deliberate touch. He literally tried to duck. There was a teammate behind him also trying to clear the ball.
@SheintochM@rohino@AbsoluteBruno Exactly. I have no idea why they gave 10 minutes in the first place then the referee didn’t even end the match at the 10 minute mark. This incident happened in the 102nd minute.
@SheintochM@rohino@AbsoluteBruno That’s the main reason the sensor was put in the ball. To record every touch on the ball and send to the officials. Sometimes the replay doesn’t tell the full story. We’ve seen cases where VAR ruled out goals because a “toe” was offside. Replays won’t show that.
@rohino@AbsoluteBruno It was used earlier in Sweden’s match against Tunisia to disallow what would have been Sweden’s 4th goal in that match. Almost no one realised it until the referee announced it.
@SheintochM@rohino@AbsoluteBruno That’s why rules are part of the game. These little things count. Same way the goal line technology is used to check if the ball 100% crossed the line because in some scenarios, it looks like the ball would have crossed but checking it, not every part of it crossed the line.
@KINGBRONK@AbsoluteBruno Did you even read what you posted? What’s the last statement there? Did veiga have control of his movement in ducking? You clearly aren’t smart
@rohino@AbsoluteBruno There’s a sensor in the ball. It shows you’ve not following the games well. If you did, you’d noticed the same sensor was used against Isak. Now back to your argument, was there contact, yes. Does the ball tragectory need to change for his teammate to be offside? No.
@vince_milicevic@tobyasky “Sitting there”. You can’t see that he was ducking when the ball hit him or can’t you see a teammate behind him? Are you lots blind?