absolutemessi
Region: IT
Wednesday 08 July 2026 12:32:32 GMT
125140
19672
395
1775
Music
Download
Comments
Hollowshot :
Egypt was leading 2–0 until the 78th minute. The referee was good, VAR was good, and FIFA was good too! But in the 79th minute, Argentina scored, made a great comeback, and won the match. Wow! Suddenly, the referee was bad, and VAR was bad.
2026-07-08 13:22:21
1537
Kagebornxx :
From laughing to crying 😅😂
2026-07-09 06:52:23
1
it's _Sait🇸🇴 :
I want to see Spain vs Argentina final 🤩
2026-07-08 12:56:10
687
amarjee :
Messi is coming for back to back wc
2026-07-08 12:34:52
98
Павлин Галинов :
Hated for being the best🤫🔥
2026-07-08 17:53:55
66
Rohyaz :
goat editor goat player BTW 🙌 🐐
2026-07-09 02:03:30
1
🎭 :
SPEAK NOW
2026-07-08 12:39:15
24
La Yaung Thetkarit :
"I will explain, based on FIFA regulations and the analysis process of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR), why the referee's decisions in the Egypt vs. Argentina match played on July 6, 2026, might have occurred the way they did. 1. The Disallowed Goal for Egypt Usually, when VAR disallows a goal, it is because of one of two main reasons: Build-up Play: If an Egyptian player committed a "foul" (e.g., pushing, tripping) while challenging an opponent just seconds before the goal, the goal would be disallowed. The referee may have deemed that contact a foul. Offside: Even if a shoulder, knee, or foot is only an inch ahead of the last defender, VAR can instantly detect it using the "semi-automated offside" system. If the goal scorer or a player involved in the play is slightly offside, the goal will not be awarded. 2. Penalty Discrepancies This aspect is the most controversial in the football world and relies heavily on the "referee’s interpretation." Penalty awarded to Argentina: The referee awards a penalty if they deem the opponent's contact disrupted the ability to control the ball or constituted a dangerous intervention. Penalty not awarded to Egypt: The referee does not award a penalty if they classify the contact as "minimal contact" or occurring in a "natural position." Why is there a difference between the two sides? Referees typically only change decisions when there is a "clear and obvious error." If the referee on the field has already made a decision to award or not award a penalty, VAR will maintain the original decision unless they find "conclusive evidence" to change it. This is why viewers often feel that decisions are "inconsistent." While it is impossible to attribute the result of a football match solely to a referee's error or a single controversial decision, feeling this way is simply a part of being a football fan."
2026-07-08 12:43:56
3
†Ilan† :
Messi-8 goals Mbappe-7 goals Haaland-7 goals Ronaldo-7th of July in the Airport
2026-07-08 14:13:36
104
Golazo.Gfx🕷 :
Messi was like " TALK NOW"!!!!
2026-07-08 14:01:02
10
jrdaween :
Either way still did better than Ronaldo in the other games by far
2026-07-08 15:21:02
9
i𝖍𝖝𝖑𝖞i :
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.
2026-07-08 18:26:30
6
:
messi and absolute messi is the GOAT
2026-07-08 14:03:35
10
To see more videos from user @absolutemessi10x, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
