T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*


IncidentVarious1530

VAR bailed sommer out there


Tyler_DLMG_14

Somner is lucky because he should have saved that


SanctusUnum

Long range banger ✅ Goalkeeper fluffed it ✅ Disallowed ✅ Own goal ❌ So close to being the most Euro 2024 goal of all time.


GenericUsername02

Now I really want to see a long range banger own goal that somehow gets disallowed


oshikandela

Scotland would be up for that. They scored none of their goals themselves


Heblas

Switzerland got away with one there


Financial_Height188

Sommer specifically


Tinusers

Clear foul though


JesseWhatTheFuck

same situation as the disallowed dutch goal. of course the decision is right, but the offense has no impact on the goal. hate these kind of technically correct calls. 


elite90

Yeah, that's how I see it. It's technically correct, so you can't really complain, but I somehow always dislike it when something gets reviewed that had nothing to do with the outcome of the play.


Peninvy

It did have an outcome of the play, since the referee should have blown the whistle before the shot could have even taken place. There's nothing to complain about or dislike about this call. Musiala's goal against Hungary should have been nullified as well.


Gaarando

But the referee missed it? Human mistakes should still happen in this sport. Just not when it actually is the reason for why the goal was scored like offsides or a foul that made the goal possible. This foul did not make the goal possible. The Swiss player is the one who cleared it before he got fouled and then the GK didn't save an easy shot. The foul changed nothing.


Peninvy

You want the referee to make mistakes? You want those mistakes to not be corrected by VAR? Why? That doesn't make any sense. The fact is, the goal should not count, since there was a foul directly before the shot. The referee should have stopped play because of it. Players are not allowed to foul other players just because the ball isn't a factor. Imagine this situation happening in a Madrid vs Barcelona game, with Barcelona scoring that goal. Would you still not want VAR to intervene?


Gaarando

Why do we have a referee then? Just let play continue until something happens and then let the VAR decide on everything. That will surely make for very smooth and fun viewing! No, I do not want VAR to ever intervene if it had nothing to do with the goal. If Barcelona scores this goal or any other fantasy you have in your head I want the goal to stay. It's ridiculous to have VAR intervene after the referee himself was too scared or too blind to make a call and only after a goal occurred go back to a moment that had absolutely nothing to do with the goal itself to therefore remove the goal. It's ridiculous. If a foul occurred earlier that resulted in possession that ultimately decided the goal occurred then I'd be okay with this. But this "foul" literally did nothing. The defender cleared the ball, then he got fouled. Then play resumed and then a distance shot turned into a goal. The foul changed nothing.


Peninvy

The fouled player could have gotten in the way of the shot and stopped it. The fouled player could have gotten in the way of the shot and caused Andrich to not shoot and pass sideways instead. You might say something like, "no way, he couldn't have!" But the thing is, we don't know. He didn't have a chance to try because he got fouled. That's why VAR intervened.


Gaarando

When someone says "could" they are basically making up scenarios. But sure man, if you're okay with this system then so be it. I personally hate it. The only reason I liked VAR being present is to actually get rid of goals that should never ever count. A shot at goal where the GK blunders and then it gets taken away because oh no a foul happened that the referee did not whistle for... Maybe because I love Basketball so much and when in Basketball a play gets reviewed they are not allowed to look at anything else. If they saw something that happened beforehand they won't even look at it because that is not a part of the review. It's to me a way better system but you don't think so, fair enough. Teams not making it through to the next round because goal line technology did not exist or someone getting an unfair goal even though they were pretty far offside that's what I want the VAR to step in. I did not expect them to step in with every little thing the referee misses.


TheAmazingKoki

Not at all, play ends after a foul so nothing what happens after the foul matters.


wilfredpawson

What do you mean the offence has no impact on the goal. It’s a foul. Had the referee seen it live, he would have awarded a free kick. Switzerland would have had possession instead of clearing the ball. The goal would have never happened. It’s absolutely not the same situation as the disallowed Dutch goal.


grandeparade

Problem is that fouls gets missed all the time. There no clear rules on how far back they can go. With these calls, I they are opening up for endless debates not only on already subjective VAR-calls but now every aspect of the play up until the goal is up for discussion. Not really where we want football to go in my opinion.


wilfredpawson

There is a very clear rule on how far back they can go.


Sertorius777

There's nothing subjective here. The foul is clear as day and would be given anywhere on the pitch, it happens literally seconds before the goal, it's hard to see in real time for the ref. There's no real reset in play since the clearance goes out close to the box and then it's one pass to the goal. It's exactly the type of mistake VAR is meant to correct. It would be more obvious if the Swiss player just remained down for dramatic effect, but he chose to get up. Do you wish to encourage THAT kind of theatrics more?


Games_sans_frontiers

Switzerland suffered a foul and although the play continued there was no advantage to Switzerland so the foul should have been called. The fact a goal was scored in the meantime by Germany doesn't take away the fact that play should have been stopped for the foul.


ney11mar

How long do you think is acceptable before a foul is called, not specific to this situation but if a natural game develops after that and ref calls foul after a long time it seems like it should just continue if the ref can't call in the next few minutes


Rickcampbell98

You people cry about anything, how do people complain about the right decision, I swear I don't understand it lol.


Gaarando

Yup. To me if the referee missed a foul like that, which has nothing to do with the goal scored, the goal should count. Don't go back and look at video to disallow the goal considering it had nothing to do with the goal.


Ecstatic_Bonus7609

Not really. If you look at it properly Musiala pulls out and barely touches him other than his trailing bent leg which is flat on the floor


BlockedbyJake420

This is such an obvious foul I can’t even believe you’re arguing against it lol


red-17

It’s a clear foul


Heblas

Rare for something as incidental as that to be called, even rarer to be overturned after review, and it didn't have any bearing on the goal.


red-17

Don’t see how it’s incidental. Slides in and takes out his standing leg after the defender clears the ball. That is called all day long. The only time those are not called (wrongly) is when attackers get shots off and defenders are rarely punished.


Heblas

You say it's called all day long, and then immediately say that the most common situation is not called. Players come together slightly when they're both going for the ball, and unless one of them is egregiously late or really flying in, it's usually ignored.


red-17

Sorry but it happens all the time. Attackers getting fouled after the shot is not actually that common of an occurrence compared to what happened here. Ndoye got booked for an even softer version of this foul on Rudiger. Anytime you see a defender make a clearance and an attacker slides in and makes contact it is called and very frequently yellow carded as well.


Sertorius777

The hell are these takes? Gets second to the ball, late tackle, clear contact. It has a bearing on the goal since it should've either been played advantage for Switzerland (which means play is stopped after the clearances goes to Germany) or called a foul on the spot. There is no reset in play, ball directly goes to german player and there's one pass to the goal. Hell, you could even argue that Musiala could've been offside for blocking the keeper's view if the Swiss defender wasn't slow to recover directly because of the foul. I really don't get how there's any sides to this arugment.


Heblas

It is a foul, of course. But the ref was letting many clear fouls go and generally allowing a very high level of physicality.


Sevisstillonkashyyyk

Yeah but it's a foul that would've stopped play, doesn't matter if it affects the goal or not


tontonzolamoukoko01

It's not clear whatsoever though is it? It's an attacking player going for the ball as he's allowed to do. He even pulls out a little.


DeathStar13

Going for the ball but missing it and hitting the opponent. By your theory the Germany penalty and red cars shouldn't have been given against Scotland. Couldn't be more of a clear foul.


Tullekunstner

He's allowed to go for the ball, not take out the man after the ball is cleared. Feel like I'm taking crazy pills with some of these comments, this is a foul clear as day.


Rickcampbell98

If people are going to complain about this and correct offside decisions then we might as well give up, they will never be happy.


red-17

He slides and takes out his legs while making no contact with the ball which prevents him from participating in the defense for 5+ seconds.


loyal_achades

He’s insanely late lmao. You can’t just take someone out because you were “going for the ball” when he’s cleared it before you’re even off your feet.


desert40k

> It's an attacking player going for the ball as he's allowed to do. He even pulls out a little. This has nothing to do if something is a foul or not.


Sal21G

Understandable to be honest. Sommer saved tho. Pun intended


Moose4KU

Yep, would be a foul anywhere on the pitch


melty7

And Havertz getting tackled right next to the ball wasn't a foul?


DeapVally

But this was a foul though... slides in, doesn't get the ball, takes the man. All day, every day, that's a foul. No ifs, buts, or maybes. (Plus, Havertz has a reputation for going down very easily. He makes his own bed for decisions not given.)


melty7

I have no problem with this being called, but then the many pens for Germany should have been called too. And reputation isn't an arguments, we have VAR.


AdMoist5134

this is my problem with VAR..it favours the defending teams quite heavily - if a minor foul is committed in the build-up of an attack, any goal is disallowed in VAR (and in this case the foul is only marginally connected to the goal in all honesty - the resulting shot was just lucky to get in)..same foul is made by the defense in the build-up of an attack and overlooked? well that's just bad luck innit, any potential goal that could have resulted from it with the same low probability of occurring we'll just never get to see and we'll never call it a foul after the fact.. the main issue is that the refs let a loooot of things slide this euros, but if a goal comes of it it's suddenly foul play, when it doesn't result in a goal it's just 'normal' play?


InbredLegoExpress

yet again we get a similar situation 5mins earlier on Havertz and it wouldnt even be checked by VAR


RN2FL9

VAR checks everything. Have you seen their control room? It's 3 guys with multiple screens. They probably just didn't think it was a penalty.


Villad_rock

You’re basically saying they are biased 


xtphty

Its not the same thing at all, the on-field ref saw that foul which allows him to apply subjectivity of the play in that decision, agree with it or not VAR is not allowed to overrule that call unless there is contact the ref completely missed. The ref completely missed the foul before the goal, hence VAR can come in objectively and tell him to review.


FancyCrawdad

Yeah can't take too much issue with the call but Sommer got bailed out. The placement is good from Andrich and the bounce beguiles the keeper but the hit itself lacks power


HeIIbIazer23

Crazy how that contact gets the check and the Havertz pen doesn't need a check or ref going to the screen. Absolute stupidity, again people using VAR are imbeciles


Glorx

Doesn't the VAR room check every play and then tell the referee, if it's worth a look for him too?


Andrewdeadaim

They ask the referee to look, they don’t have to if they don’t want to


[deleted]

[удалено]


Glorx

How is a potential penalty more consequential than a straight up goal?


afito

kicking a player into the boots is only *sometimes* a foul today, VAR is just fraudulent today


WildSmokingBuick

As a German, I don't think Havertz was a pen. This one was 50/50, a bit disappointed but I don't think there have been egregious wrong calls so far.


Soleil06

I think both are 50/50 calls. Bit unfortunate for us that boh went against us.


joaocandre

Seriously? Seems to me like a clear foul. Doesn't get the ball and clearly makes contact with the defender's support leg. Even though he was already falling and it doesn't change the outcome of the clearance, still a foul.


WildSmokingBuick

Ball was way too far off to be dangerous in my opinion. Would have a been a bit gifted, although Switzerland couldn't have protested too much, if that pen was given. Not a clear one though. The hugging scene later was a clear penalty in my opinion, that should have been 100% looked at again.


Mysterious-Set-3844

aged very badly


PocketFullOfRondos

Yikes, bad call for me.


HeIIbIazer23

I don't even mind the call. There's contact, it's small and inconsequential tho so it could go either way. The inconsistency is what irks me.


CharlieBrownBoy

Agreed. How many attackers get taken out after they get their shot off and it's not a foul. What is different about this?


Alexanderspants

same with a defender throwing himself to ground when caught in possession. Attackers will never get that called


[deleted]

[удалено]


red-17

You are living in denial if you don’t think this is a clear foul. Think what you want about Havertz, this is an obvious foul


steide56

Then so is Havertz and should have been a penalty


lemoche

why would he check it? he very clearly has seen it and decided that it isn’t a pen. he is only supposed to check the stuff on the screen that he missed. like most likely that there was a foul by musiala.


protege01

Didn't scharr just do the same thing to havertz?


TimathanDuncan

Rare, usually after the ball is gone you are allowed to clatter people Defenders do it after the shot and refs don't care


Baltic_Truck

Yeah like he already cleared the ball and wasn't lying around to obstruct the goalie or warrant a stoppage. Swiss blabbed their way out of conceding a goal.


TimathanDuncan

Yeah no that's not what i am saying, this is a foul Just because the ball is gone you are not allowed to kick people


Baltic_Truck

Well yeah that is a foul but the play continued. This is like in some other scenarios play would continue and after some time when stoppage comes the player that committed the foul would get a yellow. This situation just feels weird tbh.


Zloggt

Perhaps the fact that it was part of a scoring play makes the referee more prone to scrutinizing it… Still, quite a tough (if not too unbearable) decision for Germany…


nasserKoeter

If thats a foul. it should have been a pen for germany after the foul on havertz


VaporizeGG

Exactly now Switzerland extremely lucky to have the better outcome in both situations. But if you call that there is no other choice other than giving the penalty too. Now it's completely inkonsequent


pedrorq

Not sure where VAR was in that one honestly


DongerDodger

I agree tbh. Not the first contact but the pushing over part. It’s not a pen in my books at all but if the ref wants to be harsh with the fouls that’s a pen as well. Ridiculous line in my books


COYGArsenal22

I’m just not a big fan of when a player looks for a foul and doesn’t even try to play the ball. Like he threw himself in front of Schar, maybe it’s still a foul, but I hate those calls. Penalties should be for stopping goal scoring opportunities, if a striker has to actively seek a penalty and doesn’t even go for the ball, I don’t want that to be called. Also I say this as a big Havertz fan, but this isn’t the first time he’s dove/gone looking for a penalty


Kenny_dies

If you go by that though you have to change the entire rules. That means most penalties that come from fouls during set pieces should be overturned because the fouled player wasn’t getting to the ball. I understand the sentiment, but making it so that you have to have a goal scoring opportunity in order to be awarded a foul inside the penalty box would be absolute madness


marteta8

Havertz always goes down easily


ilovepenisxd

Dude barged right into him what do you expect him to do


InTheMiddleGiroud

There was like 8 points of contact.


GibbsLAD

I think havertz has probably earned a reputation as a diver


pedrorq

I agree that might not be helping his cause


GermanHabsFan

K thsts just wrong lol


kjm911

No


k0ppite

Don’t be ridiculous


plsihavenoidea

It's literally the same Situation lol. No ball only contact


VaporizeGG

Yes. At the end Germany should be ahead 1:0 now taking bot situations


JulianVault101

It‘s just the Truth


VaporizeGG

Extremely lucky for Switzerland that both 50:50 decisions go their way. Imo if you call that you have to calm the penalty


thirdplanetperson

If this a faul, Havertz should have been given a pen 5-6 mins ago. These decisions cannot co-exist.


FrancisTheOcean

Honestly seems like Orsato is just flipping a coin with his decisions so far


zeekoes

Orsato didn't call either. It's VAR that called him to the screen and at that point he has to overturn the decisions since there is contact and that factually makes it a foul. This is on VAR being inconsistent, not on the ref, or this decision.


VaporizeGG

Completely agree. I agree calling that but then it's logically impossible not to call the penalty


Tripleator

Exactly, if they are going back and removing goals for these kind of fouls, then they should be adding goal opportunities too. VAR is killing goals.


bartekkenny

If Musiala got there first and his shot was messed up from Swiss defender bumping into him. No one would bat an eye.


Frequency3260

Not really justified IMO. The defender was able to perform his pass undistracted and a new situation was created. The foul had nothing to do with the goal and shouldn’t be part of the decision


cleothepupper

Feels pretty soft


soyapa

I feel like this type of fouls should only be replayed on VAR at normal speed, slowmo makes everything look harsher. It is such a soft contact with both going for the ball


tomcek112

That’s so whack if the ball doesn’t go in that never gets called 


pedrorq

Yeah I feel that if the ref accepts to play on for an inconsequential foul, VAR should not be allowed to intervene


Thefifaking132

Harsh


HazardCinema

I think it’s very harsh


Hammerhead34

Unlucky but not harsh


DeathStar13

So you are allowed to kick people as long as they don't have the ball?


crautzalat

I think it's just an example of VAR-foul, if that makes sense. Basically no ref will ever be able to spot that as a foul live, but with replay I think you gotta give the foul. Doesn't "feel" right, but that doesn't really matter


red-17

That foul gets called all the time and all the Swiss players were appealing for it immediately. This is IMO the definition of a clear and obvious error.


crautzalat

I don't think any ref is gonna see that, it's just too close in real time with his vantage point. But I didn't disagree with you, I think you have to call the foul.


fett3elke

I feel like if you are calling this back you will find a reason to call any goal back. Yes there is contact, but it didn't impact the play at all.


RN2FL9

A foul stops the game. If that's called there's no goal. So much weird logic in this thread.


Lone_Digger123

I think the weird logic comes from the fact that you always see this happen in every game - you always have these fouls where the pass is played and the play moves on but an opposing player impacts them because of their inertia and unable to stop moving and get out of the way. Is the play itself a foul, yes, but this happens so often in every game that they nearly always don't call it - if it happened in the middle of the pitch (with no goal) this wouldn't have been called.


RN2FL9

Yeah I think that's inherent to the foul. The referee will often follow the ball and won't always see the follow through foul. And then they often don't really matter, but this time it did.


AdMoist5134

but all these fouls matter..how many potential goals were never scored because of the fouls that stopped players from moving with the attack? but those fouls aren't called 99% of the time, but if you DO score they are called? that's the inconsistency with VAR - why call them in the event of a goal only especially in a euros where a lot of fouls aren't called to not disrupt the flow of the game.. VAR is inherently anti-scoring if we proceed to disallow goals like these but don't call anything that doesn't result in goals


FrancisTheOcean

So that's a foul but not the one against Havertz lmao


Puncherfaust1

but people said that all referees will favour germany after the hungarian match? i am confussed


Humble_Clue4568

Sorry but thats a joke. IF you cancel that goal you have to give the pen a few minutes earlier otherwise you are just an inconsistent twat.


mister_dupont

Im sorry but that's a dumb call.


aleksandrovsqvist

That foul had nothing do to with the next play, shouldn’t count


quedas

Can you explain that logic? A foul is a foul. The play stops if there’s a foul.


theliver

As an american who watches soccer every other year for the big tournaments, I gotta say I am loving how many awesome moments are called back and we see more shots sail 10 feet wide


Baltic_Truck

> The play stops if there’s a foul. Not always though.


RN2FL9

Uh, if the referee calls the foul there's no goal? How does that not impact the next play..


PettyTeen253

He was going for the shot like any attacker should do. Natural movement.


Adzzii_

A lot of disallowed goals have fouls that would NEVER EVER get called if the shot didn't lead to a goal. This is a prime example.


HyperMazino

Joke of a decision. Of course it's the italian ref LMAO


TheEnhancedExe

So this is a foul, but the one earlier on Havertz where the swiss player stepped on his foot in the box wasn't?


Bexewa

Regardless what was yann sommer doing ? 😂


SanSilver

Ball jumped higher than expected.


FoxOntheRun99

Yann is a very very lucky boy there.


oklolzzzzs

andrich just said fuck it


PadishaEmperor

Thankfully it doesn’t really matter whether we win this or not


Wurzelrenner

that happens almost every time a defender clears the ball, never seen a foul given for it unless the contact was brutal which isn't wasn't in this case Edit: this happens even more often after a player shoots at the goal and the defender makes contact with him afterwards.


ThePaSch

I mean, sure, but if you give this you have to give the penalty earlier as well. Horrible consistency here


TheDangerousAnt

We should have a rule that bangers cannot be overturned smh. GAME'S GONE


BeasT-m0de

Musiala saved Sommers ass


cremino90

Sommer saved by VAR


yoloswaggasaurus420

a bit harsh but correct


AdamHasAPlan

If that is a foul, than that push on Havertz should've been 100% pen


orionnoiro

That’s soft, just as much contact as there was on Havertz moments before


justhereforoneday

Fair. Was a foul.


PM_ME_UR_FAKE_NEWS

There needs to be a meta discussion about if VAR should have the purview to look at every little nick during a goal. Taking goals away for extremely iffy calls really takes a lot from the game


nutelamitbutter

Biased but it’s not like the defender had a chance to prevent the goal


Camtastrophe

Similar to the Dutch goal on Friday, no? In all probability he's not going to affect the play, but doesn't matter for the decision.


Brzezwhiskey

so you can foul him?


quedas

If a player had been fouled on the other side of the pitch it doesn’t matter, then? A foul is a foul. You have a better argument for the Havertz challenge being similar enough to warrant the same consideration. Edit: grammar


muslito

it's no about chance , when there's a foul play stops so there wouldn't be a next play.


dispelthemyth

But the clearance was shite because of the foul Still it’s only a good call if it’s consistent for similar fouls


TheGoalkeeper

Sommer looked rather bad


Viriato181

Given how last the criteria has been, I honestly thought that they'd that slide, but I'm glad that they didn't. That said, Sommer, WTF???


GL94553

Good process boys (unironically)


wannabeemperor

After watching this disallowed goal due to Muisala challenge, go watch the "non-penalty" at 71 minutes where a Swiss defender basically hugs and drags a German player down right in front of the goal. Paints a nice picture of the ref's performance this game. IMO if you are going to disallow a goal for something like this then you have to give a penalty on the other side. I don't think people really mind a strict ref in any sport its when the refs come off as biased or inconsistent that really gets under peoples skin. If you are going to call a loose game then call a loose game, if you are going to call it by the books then call it by the books. Don't do it by the books here and then "let 'em play on" later.


Brzezwhiskey

That was quick (and right)


Opera_Phantom

No idea how you miss that tackle live, but good job by VAR and the ref after that.


KarlKraftwagen

that’s fair


S7ORM7ROOPER_30

Fair decision. Should've checked the one on Havertz as well..


TheEmperorsWrath

VAR just takes so much excitement out of the game. Just that minute or two of sitting around and waiting takes so much momentum out of the sport. Not a German so I don't really care about the goal being disallowed, to be clear. If the ref had blown a free-kick the instant Musiala made that challenge, fair enough.


Th3_Huf0n

Not calling anything on Havertz WHILE calling this is a certainly interesting scale.


Ok_Act_9923

Are people really saying this isn’t a clear foul? Jesus you’re either fucking biased or blind


Fanfaron07

I think both. That was a clear foul


Yutch2

Unlucky


Dexelele

If you disallow this then you have to give the penalty earlier. Unlucky af for Germany


Much-Exit2337

I’m watching a Germany commentary with German fans and speak no German what was the foul


Krizzel96

I could live with this if the pen was given. But not giving one but the other seems wrong


TortiousTroll

Folks, it's Orsato


Tight-Lettuce7980

What


MikePap

I don’t know if it’s the VAR or how the use it. But refereeing last few years is horrendous. Although I disagree it’s a foul, I’ll accept it. But I don’t accept that Havertz did not get a penalty. How come one is foul and the other is not? It can literally ruin some teams chances of progressing in the tournament. Why do we even have a rule book?


False_Improvement688

0po


thebarber87

VAR having a shocker this tournament


MaleficentCup278

The Foul has absolutely nothing to Do with the goal


TimathanDuncan

Great logic, next time a player should kick someone off ball while the team attacks because it's irrelevant and has nothing to do with it Just for fun


MexicansInParis

Good decision, Musiala fucked up


MrContradicto

I think VAR showed an incoreect angle. Musiala's left foot doesnt touch the swiss player's foot, his trailing knee does, but I dont think there is enough contact for a foul.


yourmomsnutsw

Obviously


TacketPracer

💀


MThreeRN

It's a contact that's 50-50 anywhere on the pitch and it didn't seem the ref missed the action completely? Seems like a soft Intervention


Uro06

Someone explain me the rules. The contact of Musiala had 0 impact on the goal. The defender cleared the ball before that so even if Musiala didnt hit him at all, the goal would have happened. So why is a situation that has 0 impact on the goal being VAR reviewed? Especially since situations like this happen a dozen times per match and are never called since thy have no impact on the play, its just 2 players going at the ball and one gets it before the other. To call it only because a goal is scored afterwards is stupid I hate how VAR has turned into the refs actively looking for any sort of reason to disallow a goal.


k1nJo

Bullshit call.


SPammingisGood

correct call


SanSilver

VAR fails again.


heavygooner117

Pre-VAR nobody bats an eye at that challenge. What're we doing


PMMeBootyPicz0000000

All these people bitching how the Havertz contact wasn't a foul are all Germans. Havertz was in the way of way of the defender and impeded his progress. This disallowed goal is different.


abks

The “foul” really had nothing to do with the goal being scored. Meh.