What’s the point of having VAR if you don’t have all the right camera angles to really see if that ball went in or not? In my opinion, it went in. Campbell was so far back on the first shot, I think that one was close. But whoever got the next shot off definitely put it in. We add all these minutes to these games because of VAR which takes a toll on the legs of these players, so if you’re going to use VAR, get all the right camera angles so that the right call is being made. Goal line technology is a must as well. Imagine this was the last play of the championship?
How can you tell it clearly went in. You do know right, the whole ball needs to cross the goal line and from all the angels I saw. You can't stay that it did or did not which means the ref would have to keep the original call which was a no goal.
VAR ruling it a no-goal looks to me incorrect. All you need to do is watch 6:27 to 6:34. In one frame, the striker hits the ball, and the ball is viewable and hans't fully crossed the goal line. The next frame, the ball is not longer visiable. The striker nutmegged the GK. The ball is between GK legs. GK squats down, which makes the goal even easier to see. I don't see how VAR didn't rule this as a goal.
VAR didn't rule it no-goal, they didn't have sufficient evidence to call it an error. At 6:27, the ball is clearly outside goal line as it comes off the defender's foot, then rebounds into Campbell's knee. The knee ends up in the field by 2 or three inches when the ball goes under her. Since the goal line is 5 inches wide and the ball's diameter is 9 inches, that means that even if the ball is under Campbell, the ball has to be 16" behind her knee, which, even for a 6' GK seems pretty far back. Not saying it didn't score, but I don't think it's enough to call it a clear error.
Never. Last I saw, Hawkeye GLT costs upwards of $350K per stadium, plus $50K per year per stadium to operate. For the number of times GLT can be definitive where VAR can't, that's a poor ROI and I can't see the NWSL owners choosing to implement it. It would also probably be made redundant if and when semi-automated offside ever comes to NWSL.
What this replay didn't show was that it was a handball by Bright. Her head never touched the ball. It hit her arm, and then went through the goalie's legs on the follow up. The ref didn't clarify why it wasn't a goal, but I believe HAND BALL makes the most sense. You can see the replay of it in other videos of this play elsewhere.
I think the ball went in, but from another angle it looks like it may have grazed Bright's arm before her first shot, so possibly a handball. Whatever it was, the refs should be able to announce those big decisions to the crowd!
I'm new to soccer. Can someone explain why that wasn't a goal. Didn't it cross the line to hit Jane's knee? Also why was there a penalty kick? What did she do wrong?
For a goal it has to cross the line completly. If even one inch of the ball is still on the goal line it's no goal. Very close call here. The ball hit her arm inside the penalty box. That's only allowed if the shot is from very close range (so you couldn't possibly react) or if the arm is not increasing the body area. Thats why defenders try to put their arms behind their backs when going to block a shot inside the box.
Things to considder here. are did the ball hit the strikers arm? If yes it is a free kick. The hand ball is always an offence if it is by the scorer of a goal in the build up and no other players touch it before the player scores. If the keeper saved it then we have to ask if after the first save it was bundled into the net while in the keepers control. If the keeper has one hand on the ball an it is on the ground, the keeper is deemed to be in control of the ball and attackers can't kick it. Both these offences would result in a foul to the keeper. if neither of these offences occured we would have play carry on until there was some other stoppage. It didn't. Had the play been stopped and it wasn't one of the above things it would not have resulted in a free kick in the 6 yard area, which is what was awarded. If the referee had stopped play and it wasn't a goal and it wasn't an offence by the attacking team a drop ball would have had to be used to restart the match. We therefor have to believe that it was not given because it was handball as the ball almost certainly crossed the line without the keeper having a hand on it.
Needs goal line tech and multiple view cameras installed to make sure next time. This shows the problem when not introducing this for the ref to judge it when that close.
