To be clear: Whether it is or isn’t a red to Balogun is now irrelevant. Government interference is a violation of FIFA Article 2 & 15, and the punishment is disqualification and suspension. Nepal was suspended.
This is an admission of the violation.
@fcportomaradona Aqui não decidiu ganhar! Aqui foi o único momento do mundial em que a decisão de substituir Ronaldo é um claro erro! A única substituição que ele acertou ontem, foi meter o Ruben Neves! Todas, todas as outras foram completamente erradas e destruíram a equipa!
@GaboDauzon@fifamedia@adidasfootball@FIFAWorldCup Porque as situações que definem quanto a verificação tem de ser feita estão bem definidas! Nos cantos só há verificação e reversão se o canto é mal marcado! Se o erro é não marcar o canto não há reversão!
@MR_FCB1@daniel_hdzf@fifamedia@adidasfootball@FIFAWorldCup To cancel out an offside position through a touch by a defender, that defender must play the ball with control. It’s in the law. Otherwise, there would be no offside on rebounds from balls saved by the goalkeeper.
@MR_FCB1@brunomigueln@fifamedia@adidasfootball@FIFAWorldCup because even though there’s intent to make the save, it’s a save in which there is no CONTROL OF THE BALL! It’s not the intention, it’s the control of the ball that counts!
(2/2)
@MR_FCB1@brunomigueln@fifamedia@adidasfootball@FIFAWorldCup If it hadn’t been Veiga, and it had been the goalkeeper who, to prevent the goal, deliberately parried the ball forward (with intent) towards the Croatian player who is offside, that would also be offside (1/2)
@MR_FCB1@blurysteph@fifamedia@adidasfootball@FIFAWorldCup Commenting without knowing the rules!!! It doesn’t matter whether Veiga wants to cut the ball or not, what matters is that in that cut he never has control of the ball, and that’s what the rule says.