@cnn: While announcing faster bus service in New York City, Mayor Zohran Mamdani said Egypt "got robbed" in its World Cup Round of 16 loss to Argentina. #CNN #news

LincX :

Jeřřidov Manðœrńaúv Yærńeav :

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.

Spоngebob :

Following back the first 10000 people😸

alonweinstein321 :

another football expert

thepharaohinstilettos :

It was soooo unfair💔

Abdool Fakira :

Zak📚 :

Thank you for your honest and genuine thoughts, Mr. Mayor. I truly agree with you🙏🥰🔥

Aidan Robidoux :

Imagine giving up 3 goals in 17 minutes

TeeTee :

Out of topic

Matt k :

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.

252+46 :

Zohran Mamdani i like this guy on everything i love, always defending what’s right😁

RRA12242 :

CNN should put the whole answer, he said also i can have breakfast with my family

Shellby :

he is always honest

The Clowndiver🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 :

The problem isn't the VAR, it's how you use it and football has learned how to use it properly, Rugby has.

Thesispros :

Ilike this guy

Abdool Fakira :

Sharmotaslayer :

Samuel Goncalves :

Wow

Kate Bolduan :

Interesting comment, but let’s keep the focus on the policy announcement too.