How can there be no interference when the player was standing pretty much where the goalkeeper would've dived the attacker hadn't been there? It is pretty much the definition of interference.
@@floris2360well unfortunately mind-reading technology hasn't been incorporated into VAR yet, so until then the rules have to assume he wanted to dive but was interfered with. Not a goal.
sad to see that so little people actualy know what the rules are and Just feel like it was a goal. If you are in an offside position in line with the shot that is travelling towards goal than you are offside and it does not matter if the goalkeeper might or might not have reached it.
@@RandomIdiotGS obviously????. the keeper could not dive to the left now could he? and btw I'am dutch , I want the goal to stand, but rule was applied correctly
@@kelseth1Maignan is not jesus, are you blind? Slow it down and see if he had any chance to save that ball, he didnt... very simple. Even if dumfries didn't stand there the ball would've gone in the back of the net before maignan even had the time to react.😂
It was 100% a goal, makes no sense... The var has ruined football, it's not even fun anymore because you need to wait 5 minutes to celebrate every fkng time.
Honestly the football I understand or used to understand is so different it’s like the rules is all different that’s why I don’t comment when controversial debates happen
That is very old rules that don't apply anymore, current rules need you to touch the ball or obstruct vision of the keeper or interfere in the play by for example by setting a block. It is clear that did not happen so should have been a goal. No debate possible on this, it just are the rules which are simple to apply but if you want another team to win a ref can play stupid.
That is only if you are a part of a play, which you are not if you are just standing still somewhere on the field (like Dumfries). There is no footballing law that says you are always offside if you are behind the defenders. In other words, you, like VAR and the referee, are making it up on the spot and affecting the game because you don't know the rules.
It's France, what do you expect??
Anthony Taylor robbing Liverpool in the Euros as well
Liverpool at the euros???
Moments like this is when the ref has the power to decide who wins the game and thats the problem. If thats the new rule stick to it for every game
I feel sorry for xavi.😢
Definitely a goal. There was no interference and that goalkeeper was never going to get anywhere near it to save it. What a load of crock
How can there be no interference when the player was standing pretty much where the goalkeeper would've dived the attacker hadn't been there? It is pretty much the definition of interference.
@@al1979rockerbecause he wouldn’t have dived
@@floris2360 and you know that how?
@@floris2360well unfortunately mind-reading technology hasn't been incorporated into VAR yet, so until then the rules have to assume he wanted to dive but was interfered with. Not a goal.
@@kelseth1 by the perspective the keeper had, the defender was blocking him the sight to the ball, so simple is it
This VAR is getting ridiculous!
This guy sounds like a real expert
Another disallowed goal leaving us disillusioned where football is headed.
Yet again English referee ruin the joy like in Prem...that should be a goal 😡😡😡
No goal people feel bad because it’s Netherlands. If it was francs ppl would be like ehh what ever
sad to see that so little people actualy know what the rules are and Just feel like it was a goal. If you are in an offside position in line with the shot that is travelling towards goal than you are offside and it does not matter if the goalkeeper might or might not have reached it.
Only if you are a part of the play or interfere with the keeper or obstruct the keeper's vision. Which he obviously wasn't.
@@RandomIdiotGS obviously????. the keeper could not dive to the left now could he? and btw I'am dutch , I want the goal to stand, but rule was applied correctly
@@kelseth1Maignan is not jesus, are you blind? Slow it down and see if he had any chance to save that ball, he didnt... very simple. Even if dumfries didn't stand there the ball would've gone in the back of the net before maignan even had the time to react.😂
Amateur pundit
It was 100% a goal, makes no sense... The var has ruined football, it's not even fun anymore because you need to wait 5 minutes to celebrate every fkng time.
Even without the VAR the referee could have decided it is not a goal. Such controversery happened in the past when VAR wasn't existing.
@@orijin77Not that you need to wait 5 minutes, i watch football for 20+ years and since the var it's just not the same.
Jay Bothroyd thinking it was a goal is all I need to confirm it was offside.
France🤮
Honestly the football I understand or used to understand is so different it’s like the rules is all different that’s why I don’t comment when controversial debates happen
If your offside your interfering with play
Unless you’re clearly retreating and away from play. Which Dumfries was not.
That is very old rules that don't apply anymore, current rules need you to touch the ball or obstruct vision of the keeper or interfere in the play by for example by setting a block. It is clear that did not happen so should have been a goal. No debate possible on this, it just are the rules which are simple to apply but if you want another team to win a ref can play stupid.
That is only if you are a part of a play, which you are not if you are just standing still somewhere on the field (like Dumfries). There is no footballing law that says you are always offside if you are behind the defenders.
In other words, you, like VAR and the referee, are making it up on the spot and affecting the game because you don't know the rules.