ilyonerr
Region: CA
Tuesday 07 July 2026 18:28:14 GMT
131846
20817
1136
2520
Music
Download
Comments
결론🍉 :
savior of Argentina
2026-07-07 23:35:11
1588
J✿mana :
was literally Egypt vs FIFA
2026-07-07 20:31:12
1300
plotrelevant :
Guys! Disallowing the goal was the correct decision because: 1. VAR intervention was valid: The incident was part of the continuous build-up play leading directly to the goal. According to the rules, VAR has the right to review the phase. 2. It was a foul: The player stamped on Lisandro while he was in possession of the ball. This stamping prevented him from taking a step to run, which constitutes an obstruction of play. Incident 2: No penalty was awarded because: 1. Mo Salah had already lost possession: It was no longer considered an active attacking phase. 2. Alvarez's leg was stationary: It was Mo Salah who initiated the contact by moving his leg into Alvarez. This type of contact is usually only penalized if the moving player is on the attack, but as stated in point 1, Salah had already lost the ball. From another perspective, Salah actually obstructed Alvarez. 3. The contact was extremely minimal: The touch was too light to be considered a foul.(not my comment idk who wrote it )
2026-07-08 06:43:12
6
MOATAZ || معتز :
refs was handing out red and yellow card to our players like it's candy 🥀💔
2026-07-08 00:21:26
242
Hatred :
in my opinion, Egypt should have won the match. First, Egypt’s second goal should never have been disallowed. The referee let play continue, then VAR went back about 21 seconds to find a foul that happened far away from the goal. Egypt completed several passes after that, so I don’t think it should have been considered part of the same attacking move. If that goal had stood, Egypt would have been 2–0 up. Second, Mohamed Salah appeared to be fouled in the penalty area before Argentina’s winning goal. The referee didn’t award a penalty and VAR didn’t send him to the monitor. If Egypt had received that penalty, they could have scored, and Argentina’s winning attack would never have happened. Third, Hamdi Fathy also had a penalty appeal that I believe deserved at least a VAR review. Instead, play continued immediately, even though VAR had already shown it was willing to review incidents much earlier in Egypt’s attacking move. The biggest issue for me is the inconsistency. VAR went back over 20 seconds to cancel Egypt’s goal, but it didn’t intervene in the same way when Egypt had penalty appeals. To me, that felt like the standard changed depending on which decision benefited. I also think the repeated yellow cards shown to Egyptian players and staff for protesting reflected how frustrated they were with the officiating throughout the match. When I put all of those moments together, I feel Egypt were denied crucial decisions that could have changed the result. If Egypt’s second goal had counted and at least one of the penalty appeals had been given, I believe Egypt would have won the match instead of losing 3–2. That’s why, in my opinion, Egypt deserved to go through.
2026-07-08 01:03:44
490
To see more videos from user @ilyonerr, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
