@lokisdihrider: I'm so mad rn #xybca #argentinavsegypt #worldcup #dontletthisflop #xybca

🇪🇬☆Staretok☆🇪🇬[🇮🇱🕎🪓] :

Algeria and then cape Verde and now Egypt I hope Norway wins

𝙿𝙻𝙶 ☢︎︎ :

Incident 1: 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. Learn the rules

ايوب :

Argentina literally playing afcon bro what do you mean they played against Algeria Egypt cape verde and also any explanations?

🎨𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝕲𝖚𝖞𝐕𝐀❂ :

always is and always will be.

𝒯𝒶𝓁𝒾𝓈𝒶❀ :

goodboy :

Laughing so hard at this lmao none of you watch football

Belal メ :

Sam :

they had Messi stressed the whole match. And the way Argentina wasn’t even playing well the ref did everything for them😭 I’m not even surprised but all I can say is they did more than amazing ❤️‍🩹 never been so proud

Aseel :

they nearly broke the script...

🎧moody :

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.

Sama :

it was written honey, they wouldn't let Egypt win though Egypt played much better

Stela :

Argentina won 3-2, coming back from 0-2 down. Egypt's disallowed goal was for a foul by Attia on Lisandro Martínez, reviewed by VAR, which exists precisely to correct errors. The referee, Letexier, is French, a UEFA elite official, with Europa League and Euro 2024 finals to his credit. If FIFA were to choose him to favor Argentina, they wouldn't choose someone from a country competing for the same World Cup. Egypt appealed for a penalty on Salah, which is debatable, but Argentina also missed a penalty with Messi and were down 0-2. It wasn't a robbery; it was an epic comeback with refereeing decisions that always generate debate.

Valentín :