World Cup Reactions..........

[MadAmster]

Couple of no mark games, one excellent and some interesting ones. Stand out has to be Portugal v Spain. Mexico hit the right tactics to beat Germany in what I found to be an enthralling end to end game. Serbia v Costa Rica was 2 teams both trying to win but neither has great goal scoring capacity and I found it an interesting game. Russia weren't very good but their opponents were atrocious. For the Peru/Denmark game and the Morocco/Iran game see my Serbia comments. France took a while to get going and had it easy in the end. Pogba? Ineffective IMO.

VAR. Worked well up to the Brazil game for me. The Swiss goal should have been chalked off for the push which prevented the Brazilian defender jumping for the ball. Brazil should have had a penalty as well.

Refs. Best at a Finals, be that Euro or World, for a long time. Not perfect but better than they have been.

 

[MadAmster]

Korea's first goal. Would you have allowed it? I wouldn't. IMO VAR got it wrong. The question is, was it all in the same phase of play or was it a second phase? I say 1st phase in which case the Korean attacker gained an advantage from being in an offside position.

Let's take a look at what happened.

1. the ball comes over
2. A Korean player heads it forwards into the mix and the eventual scorer is stood offside
3. the ball lands at Kroos's feet and he attempts to clear but only manages to toepoke it to the player whose is stood in an offside position.
4. the Korean player scores.

IMO that is one phase of play and therefore the player was offside and the goal should not have stood.

Having said that, I am so very glad it did as I have now seen a Group stage end with Germany bottom. It's never happened before and will very likely not happen again in the next 100 years.

The image below is taken from the FIFA Offside Law description and is why I think the goal should not have stood. I look forward to your various perspectives on it.

 

[Roger Ramjet]

he was played onside by the dog in his lunch box which was part of a German Shepherd

 

[MadAmster]

I now have the explanation. Get ready for this.......

1. Korean player heads he ball towards goal, the teammate is in an offside position but not yet "interfering with play" so no offside given
2. Kroos toepokes the ball, apparently, through the legs of a teammate, the ball goes to the striker in an offside position and he puts the ball in the back of the net. That would count as "gaining an advantage form being in an offside position" so it wouldn't be a goal.
3. It now seems the the toepoke didn't "nutmeg" Kroos's teammate, the ball brushed his shorts an/or his leg. That, apparently, makes it a 2nd phase and the Korean player has been played onside. The goal stands.

This means I have to admit I got it wrong. My opinion is that, with or without the "leg brushing" it is still the 1st phase and the lad IS offside. It would appear that I am wrong but the situation is yet another that clarifies why these decisions can be oh so hard to get right.

We refs will continue to do our best and, yes, we and especially I, will continue to make mistakes. Honest ones but mistakes all the same.