Uruguayan players surrounded referee Daniel Siebert after the match, demanding an explanation. It's a shame to see that kind of brutality in the final game of Uruguay's golden generation, which deserved a better ending than that, whether it was a victory in style, or a slightly regrettable loss that satisfied the best of us.
The same thing happened twice in a row - or should we say the controversy has never stopped since the first game between Cada and Ecuador - FIFA's use of VAR at the World Cup was once again controversial, and in the case of this game between Uruguay and Ghana, it was directly Which team is at stake
advancement
No wonder the Uruguayan players are so excited.
As if by fate, the 12-yard penalty that Asamoah Gyan dropped that year was returned by the Uruguayans in this one. It's very much a story, but in terms of the fairness of the game, these two rounds have to be taken seriously if this is to be more than just a group game
advancement
What about the war? What if this is the final that decides the championship?FIFA must take such questions seriously.
In the 58th minute of the Uruguay-Canada match, Darwin Nunezs broke into the box and was knocked down directly by Cana defender Daniel Amartey, referee Daniel Siebert refused to give Uruguay a 12-yard penalty but the VAR advised him that he should go and watch the film to revisit the decision.
Siebert re-examined the round from a number of perspectives, and ultimately he concluded that Amartey had not made a clear mistake and the game continued. There was no doubt that the latter had touched the ball with his toes, but the question was whether he had fouled the ball with his hands beforehand. Some of the angles vaguely show him racking Nunez first.
Then came a tangle between Edinson Cavani and Alidu Seidu in injury time, and if the referee had given a penalty, then Uruguay would have had a chance (by then Hwang Yi-Chan had already scored) to take the lead on goal difference and win the match.
advancement
If you look at the few images given, Cavani's goal was relatively uncontroversial as it looked more like he was trying to make deliberate physical contact to win a 12-yarder, but the referee's decision not to look at the VAR is probably what the Uruguayan camp is upset about; the first one was a bit more controversial but the referee upheld the decision, which is understandable.
There is nothing to question the efficiency and accuracy of VAR since its inception. What is in question is that people have not yet adapted to it, they have not yet figured out if it should be used in all controversial situations; they have not yet decided if it should only be used by referees as a professional judgment or if it should share its full-angle view with everyone; and even the players haven't yet fully understood it - Cavani was even furious with it after the game. -Cavani even vented his anger at it after the game.
Uruguay's defeat was very similar to the controversial point of the ball out of bounds saved by Sanlibel Kaoru in the previous game. The point is not really how the referee called the penalty, and Gary Neville's comment was spot on: from the time the first offside goal was disallowed in the Ecuador v Cada game, I've been puzzled by how the broadcasters haven't been able to give us the right angle of what's going on, and that just doesn't make me feel right. We have 100 cameras in these stadiums, it's impossible to miss anything, but it's poor in terms of providing a picture, someone must have seen something clear in the VAR and they should have given it out.
Gyan, looking back at that 2010 Elite Eight loss, was open about it, saying that he was the one who missed that penalty that kept the pressure on the latter players to take penalties that shouldn't have existed, and Luis Suarez made it clear that he did indeed handball, but also that he had already been blown for a red card plus a penalty which is the ultimate punishment, and didn't need to be apologizing for Cana's missed penalty.
The main reason Cana lost that classic game was that they couldn't withstand the pressure. By the same token, the real reason Uruguay went out was that they played too conservatively in the first two games, as well as the fact that the entire golden generation was aging and the juniors hadn't yet caught up, and they were in the middle of a bloodletting period. The verdict is only a small part of it.
But like Neville and Graeme Souness said, people should have the right to know better, especially in such a crucial game.
Suarez may have played his last World Cup game, and his young son was in the stands watching the game today. After a sluggish first game and a benching in the second, he finally played in the third game with the unmatched heroics of the year, and although he lost in the end, he and his family deserved a better word.
Just like the outside world debating whether or not Sanlibel Kaoru's save was out of bounds, the verdict should be respected, but is it not possible for the officials to give the picture in a quicker and more timely manner? Couldn't they have tried to be as even-handed as possible in their rulings - if VAR is to be looked at in this case, should it be looked at in a similar case later on? This can all be done better.
Suarez had this to say: FIFA has a refereeing committee, they should explain it more clearly, it's not an excuse. This is a good note for the Group H group stage.
