r/worldcup • u/Mr0range • 5d ago
📰News Norway coach Stale Solbakken: ‘Everyone saw what happened. The ball fell straight down, just in front of the bench … so it did touch the cable. There has been nothing in the chip, what can I say against that? But the ball drops down straight from heaven…'
https://x.com/DAZNFootball/status/2076122637118390387116
u/DressLikeACount 5d ago
There has got to be like a hundred videos of different angles uploaded to TikTok or YouTube tomorrow from fans.
54
u/ToothpickTequila 5d ago
Until we get one video showing it hit this mythical wire then there's no evidence.
→ More replies (9)21
28
u/Gryzzlee Spain 4d ago
After the Croatia game with the hair follicle, and then the removal of Egypt's goal, then I have to say it is Linda weird that: A. The sensor did not not sense any impact from a cable. But I believe Haaland and Nyland when they say it did. Its contested. B. If it did touch the cable, then it was influenced and it did affect the final play if it was meant to reach further back. Does that lead to a goal removal?
I don't know, feels crappy but I don't think it has anything to do with favoritism. If anything it just makes the Croatia drama worse.
→ More replies (2)
105
83
u/Specific_Goat_3189 5d ago
The chip was calibrated to only detect hair, not wires
→ More replies (1)
64
u/tomtomtomo New Zealand 5d ago
It's good that he acknowledges that there is nothing in the chip so simply leaves it as confused rather than accusatory.
→ More replies (2)
20
u/Somewhat_appropriate 4d ago
He also said that they shouldn't focus too much on the referee.
They just didn't have the "margins" with them.
No bitterness really.
19
20
35
60
u/Limp-Pension-3337 5d ago
Nobody has clear video footage I guess. FIFA has such a shady rep though so it’s only natural that people would be talking.
→ More replies (16)22
u/Ok_Boysenberry5849 5d ago
Yeah, I've watched several videos now. Some of it have the ball do a weird thing at the top of the trajectory. Others closer to the **end** of the trajectory. It's not consistent. I'm not saying there is no hit but a day later the evidence is still all over the place and unclear.
If you put yourself in the referee's shoes... No clear evidence, and a ball sensor that says no. It's an understandable call in-game.
52
50
u/kobewit 4d ago
was that camera recording or is it just decorative? lol
release the material which was recorded and we'll easily see if it was shaken at that moment
very simple
→ More replies (1)42
u/CHUBBYninja32 4d ago
The have sensors in the ball. Sensitive enough to feel the touch of a hair apparently
23
u/BlameMabel 4d ago
With the hair, they showed a clear response but never included the trace from the subsequent header; presumably it would have been much, much larger.
With the (possible) wire, they show the trace on a scale where kicks are 50% of the graph. If the wire impact was a fraction of the kick force, we wouldn’t see it on the scale shown.
Y-axis crimes.
7
u/Anothergen 4d ago
FIFA did show the trace for the Veiga header. It's on their media page on twitter.
10
6
u/Imaginary_Papaya_803 4d ago
Theres also the bbc 3d footage that shows the ball hitting something so at least one of these technologies is not reliable
→ More replies (2)
70
u/ConsciousNet238 USA 5d ago
does FIFA have an in depth explanation for this technology?
Like was the ball simply out of range to send data being so high up? Are the sensors only pitch-level?
31
u/SocialMediausersrdmb 5d ago
No the sensors are in the ball, it works in a lab room outside of a stadium , I’ve seen a video of a man tapping his fingers and rotating the ball and the sensor picked up everything with big spikes in the graph
28
u/CantPlayTheBanjo 5d ago
Data is not stored in the ball, it transmits.
→ More replies (2)10
u/that_too_ England 5d ago
Which is a shame, would be hilarious if we had to dissect the balls after every match.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Dandan0005 5d ago
Except when a player touched the ball immediately after the Croatian player’s hair.
No spike there, for some reason
3
u/leijgenraam 5d ago
That is probably just because the timescale on the graph is really small. The touch by the Portuguese player would be longer afterwards. Although I think they should show how much time one square on the graph is.
The croatian player also said that he did feel contact from the ball.
→ More replies (1)8
19
u/_lalalala24_ 4d ago
Well Frank Lampard’s legendary goal had the ball hit the top of the goal post and dropped INSIDE the net behind the line but the goal was still called off.
Hmmm What shall we say about it?
9
u/rossmosh85 4d ago
It actually triggered the installation of goal line technology because that was so controversial.
3
u/_lalalala24_ 4d ago
It can’t be more controversial than an invisible wire or a few strands of hair
4
u/deep8787 England 4d ago
That cancelled out the illegal yet allowed goal back in the 66 final against the Germans. It sucked, but whatever.
4
u/RumJackson 4d ago
It wasn’t “called off” it was never called to begin with. The ref and linesman missed it and allowed the game to carry on.
There was no VAR or goal line tech in the 2010 tournament.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (7)3
17
58
u/OriginalRange8761 4d ago
I am a physicist, so will give a few cents here(purely my opinion). The trajectory looks aporabolic because the ball slows down due to air friction. As the ball goes upward, the air drug becomes more and more horizontal in direction(the velocity becomes more horizontal), thus the parabola becomes more acute in angle of the fall. Hence the “dive.” If it was really deflected, I bet the change would be more sudden and random. Ask yourself why the whole tracetory is nearly contained in singular plane? For that to happen with a deflection involved, the ball mustve stroke perfectly perpendicular to the wire—something rediculously unlucky.
8
u/DijonMustardIceCream 4d ago
Classic physicist - terrible spelling lol
*im a biologist so the physicist / chemist / biologist banter is real
→ More replies (6)9
29
u/Substantial_Waltz_13 4d ago
There is a video from another angle where the ball doesn’t move at all. Plus no sensor picked it up. It wasn’t touched
→ More replies (10)
14
u/UpstairsAd194 4d ago
Like the 3 way bullet that shot JFK, the ball went around hte cosmos just so that it could be diverted to harry kane 40 yards from the goal. Noone will ever notice they said.
→ More replies (1)
23
u/Samarium_15 5d ago
Can we all decide who is Fifa rigging this for?
35
u/something_python Scotland 5d ago
FIFA are rigging it against the team I support!
4
u/effu2then 5d ago
Dont need to rog with Scotland though, you guys lose all on your own 😂
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)9
26
u/spacejam4523 4d ago
I was initially infuriated when I heard this...but I've watch so many times from so many angles and it looks like a naturally flight path. The ball has some backspin so its descent is at a sharper angle, but by no means is it straight down or unnatural
13
u/LookattheWhipp 4d ago
This was my thought as well. Nyland sliced it with backspin so it hung and then dropped like a golf ball.
Also, not a single player or coach pointed in real time that it hit something until AFTER the goal
25
u/dawgoooooooo Côte d'Ivoire 4d ago
I just don’t understand how they can use var plus their sensor shit to discover a dude touched the ball with his hair, but can’t quickly investigate what happened when the sensor goes off 50 feet in the air. Like we joke about how other leagues are rigged. The way they handle the broadcast too and don’t show anything controversial on replay makes me not really wanna continue to follow the sport
12
u/iamtheliqor 4d ago
well they did investigate and they said nothing happened, also the sensor didnt go off. hope that helps
9
u/PaoPr0n 4d ago
What am I missing here? They did provide the heartbeat sensor data to show that the ball didn't touch anything until it was fielded by England. Are you just upset that it wasn't available instantaneously? As though viewing that data sooner would have had a different result? Are you implying that the data was fabricated or altered afterward to support the ref's decision to play on?
The lack of critical thinking in this sub makes it feel like facebook during a US election year.
5
u/Physical-Exit-2899 4d ago
I've been watching these games at viewing parties and you can't hear the commentary (understandable) but the footage they're broadcasting has everyone so confused as to what's going on.
Replays of random stuff, sometimes they show offside lines sometimes they don't. I have to come home and watch highlights to actually figure out what happened and even then you can hear the commentators scrambling cos they're being shown nothing and are also unsure. Whoever is responsible for these broadcasts, its been the worst I ever remember.
5
u/immer_abseits Germany 4d ago
Just fyi for you, it's FIFA. FIFA controls the cameras and the replays world wide. What I see on my screen is the same thing others see on their screen on the other side of the world. It's all the same feed. The only thing that's different is the actual broadcast and commentators. That's specific to each country. So yeah, everyone is confused what they're looking at because FIFA doesn't cue them to know what they're going to be shown.
→ More replies (1)3
u/RumJackson 4d ago
I’ve enjoyed the BBC commentary in the UK not recognising all the American celebrities that keep popping up.
5
u/ResistWild 4d ago
It really calls into question the call in the Croatia game. Besides the fact that it was an absolute farce to begin with.
29
34
4
18
19
u/Limp-Pension-3337 5d ago
They should have someone not connected to FIFA making those calls. Someone undercover like when my bar owner friend used to pay me to sit at his bar and drink just to catch staff stealing from the register
→ More replies (5)9
u/Fickle_Experience823 5d ago
Maybe you could sit and have a look in the VAR-room? You seem trustworthy
→ More replies (3)
18
22
u/Dazzling-Budget-7701 4d ago
There were 4 players and a goalie in front of Jude. Imagine if they stayed in front of him…
3
u/Middle-Welder3931 4d ago
I know right. No one is talking about how the ball dropped in the middle of the pitch and England still had to build from there. Its not like the ball dropped into the box and Jude just tapped it in.
→ More replies (1)
18
u/justforkicks28 4d ago
Let's not blame the 4 defenders in the box that had plenty of time to react to the play. It is not like it happened in the Norway box.
→ More replies (6)
22
28
u/montreal_drapes 4d ago
I just watched that clean video from the other thread about ten times and there does not appear to be any change in trajectory on the ball.
What I do see is two Norway players, one behind and one sort of beside the English player who received the ball jogging lackadaisically and making no effort to challenge for the ball. It seems like those two at least were hoping to play out the half, and maybe even expecting the whistle to blow at any second.
→ More replies (13)
28
u/Intelligent_Sky_7081 4d ago edited 4d ago
The videos I see, the ball doesn't fall straight down. Either my eyes suck of the perspective is messing with me if that's what the video shows
Even the 3d rendering they have doesn't show that to me. Unless it's not accurate?
clip in comments, not the original post.
best video ive seen. i could see it just being the backspin, it just didnt go as far as they thought it would. not a single player protests. they would know the rule that if it hits something, its a drop ball.
→ More replies (8)11
u/WabaleighsPS4 4d ago
Yeah all the videos ive seen show nothing.
I'm tired of seeing that stupid skycam video showing where the ball apparently takes a sip but it's a crappy quality video and they draw a thick ass square box around the ball the moment you're supposed to see "what really happened" then an imaginery thick line showing some odd trajectory that isn't shown in any other video from any other angle.
3
u/Intelligent_Sky_7081 4d ago edited 4d ago
This is the best clip Ive seen. (its the video in the comments, not the post itself, just fyi)
Its minimal, but I could see how someone might say it almost 'dies' and looks like some players thought it shouldve gone another 20-30 yards at least.
But at the same time i dont really see it hit anything, i can just kinda see it does seem to fall earlier than some expect (players, i mean), and their data says it hit nothing. So, backspin basically/probably.
29
30
u/Alternativesoundwave 5d ago
Should England win this goal should be known as the ball from heaven.
15
→ More replies (2)5
36
u/IrishLad-1194 4d ago
"falls straight down"
and now it's just straight up lying, lmao, you couldn't cite a video from any angle that would make it look any worse than a 45 degree drop after the apparent "contact"
→ More replies (24)
10
u/TeaWicketsAndTheOval England 4d ago
Can’t anyone use a high resolution camera to show the spin of the ball and trajectory? If it was hit and created a backspin then the ball will suddenly drop and any footballer knows that. We shouldn’t need to contact a physicist.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/Suroes 4d ago
Gravity pulls on the ball ball evenly at a constant force, there’s no reason for top of the trajectory to provide more impulse to cancel it out;
Beyond constant lift being applied by air resistance
→ More replies (1)
89
u/Think_Monk_9879 5d ago
Why do people Think fifa rigged it for England when Haaland was the most popular player in the game and the new media sensation. If anything fifa would Want Haaland-Argentina
21
u/Artistic-Tear3222 5d ago
I think they forget Norway player Sorloth didn’t even pass to Haaland for a goal he selfishly went for it himself that’s what cost them the game
3
u/The_Dark_Tetrad 5d ago
Haalands shove sealed the deal to be blunt. Major fuck ups that game. Norway should have won
47
u/Cuzimahustler 5d ago
They just don't want to admit the chip isnt as good as they think it is.
23
u/Totschlag 5d ago
Remember this is a chip that is able to detect hairs after all.
But also not have background data noise from like, grass, or a stiff breeze. And is somehow that precise while being on the inside of the ball with layers of dampening... And able to withstand absolute screamers and hard hits off the posts while being perfectly calibrated to detect hair grazes after 120 minutes and...
→ More replies (1)3
u/Sourcerid 4d ago
Surely eventually football clubs and football federations will want to do independent studies on the sensors
36
u/GoldNefariousness693 5d ago
Well England has 10x the population and a significant worldwide following. I don't think it's rigged for what it's worth.
→ More replies (3)14
→ More replies (14)36
u/TyoPepe 5d ago
We aren't calling out a rigged refereeing, but an incompetent refereeing
→ More replies (10)
135
u/SucculentChineseSwan 5d ago
‘Everyone saw…’ you can remove me from that list buddy. I’ve had 12 hours of ‘clear evidence’ and such on Reddit and I still can’t see that ball hit anything.
27
u/gratisargott 5d ago
And the 3D animation that everyone is using as “proof” right now shows that the ball didn’t in fact “fall straight down”, which is weird since loads of people yesterday were talking about how you could clearly see in the original match footage that the ball dropped straight down
13
u/SucculentChineseSwan 5d ago
There’s nothing clear about any of this. Agreed it’s strange that the best ‘evidence’ we’ve had seems to refute the claim from yesterday in terms of how the balls trajectory deviated. If you are overturning a goal, it has to be done before play resumes. They had all of this evidence, minus the bbc 3D footage and none of it was conclusive enough to overturn the on field decision.
7
u/gratisargott 5d ago
Yeah, and people are usually angry about how VAR is “desperately looking” for something that can cancel a goal.
Imagine if a Norwegian goal had been called off because the ball hit something that didn’t change its trajectory anyway. There would be an outrage and people would be talking about how the refs were reaching deep into the rule book for a technicality to help England. Most of this comes down to “it went against the team I like, therefore it’s terrible”
→ More replies (20)14
u/sainttomm 5d ago
Right, lol, this is all over the internet and is very silly. I've watched lots of replays and can't see anything but a normal trajectory, and no ball hitting a cable. And the snickometer says no too, but some ppl don't accept that. So is the snickometer irrefutable or not?! Against Croatia it was when it showed their hair touching it, but now it doesn't show anything, it is fallible?!
8
u/Tobax 4d ago
I'm so tired of hearing "it fell straight down", the side camera shows it might have grazed a cable and changed the balls trajectory slightly, only slightly. No it didn't fall straight down.
→ More replies (3)
50
u/Jazzy0082 5d ago
I'm being gaslit here. I didn't care who won this game, I have no horse in the race, but this simply did not happen.
30
u/power2bill 5d ago
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills because I cannot see it as well, no one reacted to it at the time except for Nyland. At least they could have looked at VAR to make sure. 🤷♂️
→ More replies (12)
12
11
9
u/Remote-Honeydew271 4d ago
Some things go for you, some go against you. No one knows this better than England fans - on the one hand, we suffered the Hand of God and Lampard's ghost goal; on the other hand, we gained the Peters goal in 66 and Michael Owen's dive against Argentina. Sometimes you get a helping hand, sometimes you get the hand of a cheeky little South American conman. That's football.
→ More replies (1)
19
u/dfarin153 4d ago
I watched the highlight video of the play and the flight of the ball shown from the side of the field looked completely normal to me A goal kick typically is struck with back spin. A ball kicked with a backspin carries further due to the lift it generates, but air resistence gradually slows it down and it tends to drop fairly steeply close to it's range. But I would say that the Norwegian player further up field seemed to expect the ball to carry further, and their defense appeared to pause. If they all thought the ball struck the wire, they may have expected a stoppage. It is sad way to give up a goal. There is an old saying; "Play to the whistle!" That is what the England side did.
→ More replies (7)3
u/arcticie 4d ago
Do you have a link to the video with the side view? I couldn’t find one
→ More replies (1)
40
u/mfnporkchopsandwich 5d ago
No mention of Sorloth blowing a perfect assist opportunity.
10
8
3
u/Limp_Mix5958 4d ago
Would have been ruled out by VAR anyway, there was a clear foul by Haaland in the build up.
17
u/Mattie_Doo 4d ago
Uh, no. It definitely didn’t. I know this because, as he said, “everyone saw what happened.”
18
u/JG456789 4d ago
Everyone complaining about this while Solorth could have passed to Haaland and been up 2-0. Coming from an England fan…
→ More replies (1)6
u/Les_Ismore 4d ago
Pretty comical watching him get swarmed by white shirts after the lane was clear.
31
37
u/Bob-Swan 4d ago
We have telemetry from the ball and multiple different views of the ball doing exactly what a ball should do, why is this still a discussion?
→ More replies (18)
13
u/TravellingMackem 4d ago
The best way to resolve this is to look at the spidercam view itself. Doesn't matter what its pointing at, if it hit the cable then the camera will wobble loads and it'll be very obvious that it's hit the wire
→ More replies (2)12
u/cbizzle187 4d ago
That camera is wobbling 100% of the time and is using technology to stabilize its picture. We never see it wobble on a broadcast as it zips across the field. Not a viable solution.
→ More replies (1)
14
u/marmite3000 4d ago
All of this talk and I haven't been able to see a clear clip yet, hmmm
3
u/jerwaynesinclair 4d ago
This clip is the clearest I've seen. The ball just did what balls do every week. No obvious impact with anything. No unusual movement. No player reacting.
7
u/Kalkaline 4d ago
Really the view from the sky camera would show the sudden movement of the frame from the ball hitting the cable. That would be enough evidence.
8
44
u/Ok-Amphibian4335 5d ago
Honest question. Why do we even trust said chip? It’s not something the public can watch live or audit. Why do we blindly trust it? It’s just lines and squiggles, I’m sure an AI could generate a random pattern to make it look like whatever you wanted it to.
Why can’t there be a live feed or a way to access the data for the public to restore trust? Because at this point it feels like they have VAR and a ball sensor to justify the outcome they want.
8
→ More replies (19)23
u/raouldukeesq 5d ago
The whole human hair thing completely destroys an notion of credibility
→ More replies (18)
33
u/Lame_Johnny USA 5d ago
FIFA turned on its tractor beam at that moment to throw the match for England
24
u/jdiver007 5d ago
Less Hand of God, more Wire from on Higher
16
u/farnsw0rth 5d ago
Cord from the lord
→ More replies (1)3
u/renavlt 5d ago
Have you ever noticed that theists are always like, "that's a 'cable from the Lord's table'" but then atheists are just like, "that's a 'cable from the greatest fable'''".
Personally I just lean towards a strung rope that brung hope.
→ More replies (1)
29
u/Express_Rent4630 4d ago
Yeah, definitely didn't drop straight down. Clear arc. Quit crying and ask Sorloth why he didn't play in Haaland
→ More replies (10)26
u/alextremeee 4d ago
Sorloth actually did try and play in Haaland but there’s an English cameraman in ghillie suit that gets in the way, if you watch the replay carefully you can see him even though none of the players can.
7
33
u/liamthelad 4d ago edited 4d ago
Guys I was on the secret team that FIFA created to make them win.
It's annoying to see the public have cottoned on to our dastardly plan to have the Norwegian goalkeeper's long kick go ever so slightly short by engineering it to collide slightly with a camera, with the inevitable consequence of that obviously being that an England players beats three Norwegian players and scores as the Norwegians lay paralyzed from such a phenomenal plan.
Obviously we had to pay the referee to turn a blind eye to something as obvious as a ball with backspin dropping ever so slightly in the air. And we had to doctor every bit of camera footage that existed from this highly televised and witnessed event so they all look unclear.
Unfortunately we didn't count on Reddit sleuths working out that FIFA, an organisation that has famously got on well with England, would hatch such a scheme.
29
u/Economy_Ad9889 5d ago
* the ball doesn’t fall straight down
* there is no video actually showing a wire being hit
* arrowhead stadium is notorious for strange wings
→ More replies (10)
4
2
u/iheartyoualways 4d ago
Everyone also saw #7 being selfish and not letting Harland gain the upper hand against England and yet after that, nothing was done.
→ More replies (2)
29
u/SlapHappyDude 4d ago
FIFA needs to take a long look at how they can modernize officiating.
This world cup has been an utter diaster. Futbol has always had a problem where the officials decide close matches. But compared to NFL or MLB, FIFA seems to be in the stone age for review of critical calls and it really hurts the product.
19
u/BestFriendWatermelon 4d ago
What could FIFA have done differently?
They released the ball sensor data. The moment has been captured from every camera angle imaginable. There's no footage of a wobbling cable either. But Norway swears they saw it.
Even if it's eventually proven that it did happen, how could FIFA have done anything about it in the game when all the tech they had pitchside said nothing happened? Just deny England a goal anyway based on Norway's strength of feeling?
15
u/OmegaDriver 4d ago
It's like they want to maintain the refs having as much power to throw matches as possible.
→ More replies (1)5
3
u/ethiopian_kid 4d ago
dude fifa is no where near nfl or nba in terms of officiating
6
u/SlapHappyDude 4d ago
Admittedly the NFL has the advantage every play is contained and easier to review with constant stoppage. But asking FIFA to review every scoring play seems really basic.
5
u/Gryzzlee Spain 4d ago
This is the weird thing. FIFA is bigger than them, and yet their officiating and rules are WORSE than some of the national futbol leagues.
Makes the World Cup look like trash even relative to Euros if you compare FIFA to UEFA ref committees.
14
17
u/Minia15 4d ago
There are 50+ cameras in the building. If it hit a wire we would have better video footage.
There is one angle of video footage that is a bit inconclusive.
I don’t know what happened but it’s stunning we don’t have video that can confirm either direction.
→ More replies (1)10
u/JustOneMorePuff 4d ago
Maybe because the cameras are pointed at the field not the wires (which are designed to be nearly impossible to see)
→ More replies (8)6
u/Anothergen 4d ago
Spidercam itself isn't though, and at the time of the kick should have been at its highest point.
Spidercam isn't visible on the shot behind the goal, confirm that it was high up, where it should have been. The ball never got near that height, and since the wires go from spidercam out, we know the wires were that height and higher.
So yeah, while the wires would be hard to spot, there's nothing to suggest the ball was even close to one, and given what we know about the situation, the wires were almost certainly tens of metres above the highest point in the balls arc.
17
u/immer_abseits Germany 4d ago
VAR called to review Egypt's goal that was scored 17 seconds after they gained possession on the other side of the pitch. This happened and boom, boom two passes and then goal. Why wasn't this reviewed by VAR?
I don't think there's a grand conspiracy at play here but the VAR has been so shit and inconsistent that I can see why people think there's a conspiracy. Do better FIFA. People are just asking for transparency and consistency.
7
u/rossmosh85 4d ago
Reviews happen without being televised. They're doing reviews on the background and only show the audience a few of them.
My best guess is the officials checked the ball's sensor and saw there was no blip so they quickly moved on.
It's not really their responsibility to verify the tech works appropriately. They assume it does and in this circumstance there is absolutely no evidence from the ball sensor that it hit anything.
→ More replies (7)5
u/Arctic_Chilean 4d ago
Never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence.
My take: there is no big conspiracy. FIFA is just incompletent.
→ More replies (2)
11
13
u/hazzap913 4d ago
Get a grip, instead of focusing on this which may or may not have happened, why don’t they focus on Sorloth costing them the game by refusing to pass to Haaland
→ More replies (4)
8
16
u/Yakinfishin 4d ago
If they called back the goal vs Egypt because of a foul 2 minutes before they could have easily called this back with VAR
8
u/1stTimeRedditter 4d ago
You are correct, they could have reviewed it. However they would need a full confirmation it hit so far the sensors said no and there’s no clear footage either. Goal would have stood.
7
u/fuckimbackonreddit9 4d ago
Why do people keep saying this, it was more like 30 seconds and literally in the same attacking phase of play.
This is literally the rules
→ More replies (1)5
u/Anothergen 4d ago
VAR did review and confirmed the ball didn't make contact with anything.
There's no evidence the ball even went near a wire (the wires were likely tens of metres above the highest point the ball went).
16
u/Master-Culture-6232 4d ago
Funny, because all I saw was Norway defending very lazily. The ball had allot of hang time and 2 players were in the vicinity to challange for control of the ball but they just stood there until it was too late. This is on Norway for bad defense. Take the L and move on, get better.
→ More replies (10)
17
31
u/Lump001 World Cup 5d ago
I mean it clearly didn't "drop straight down". We can all see that with the multiple camera angles buddy.
If it marginally changed direction at all, it was so slight that dozens of cameras and a chip in the ball designed to detect movement couldn't pick it up.
Could easily have just swerved slightly due to the wind.
→ More replies (1)
21
u/juanthebaker USA 5d ago edited 5d ago
The spider cam would jerk if the ball hit the cable. That footage is the easiest way to say for sure.
41
10
u/Jwicks90 4d ago
Whether it did or didn't, both teams had a lot of decisions overturned that were odd.
Also if Norway wants something to point fingers at, they should start with Sorloth.
→ More replies (6)
9
u/Spare_Jacket_3647 4d ago
The next question is "did you see it happen" to which his answer was "no"
16
u/arsehenry14 4d ago
From the flight path of the videos it doesn’t look like it dropped straight down. Some goal kicks are high arcing ones and this seemed to be that rather than a driven one.
Not saying it didn’t hit it, it may have, but neither the camera replays nor the BBC recreation that has a wobble are conclusive. The touch graph isn’t either.
The BBC flight path is interesting because as a goalie it still has a normal downward arc based on the initial trajectory. It wasn’t a hard driven goal kick. It was more of a long floater. I’m a pretty consistent kicker who can hit midfield or just beyond and that trajectory looks very similar to what I would kick if I’m going long with a floater. So I’m skeptical it hit anything. It’s possible but it would have been the slightest of touches if it did based on what the BBC flight path recreation shows nothing to me that says it dropped straight down.
→ More replies (6)
11
u/ecstasid 5d ago
The parabolic trajectory of the ball was altered! Wind or wire or wrath of God, I don't know!
→ More replies (7)
6
u/TheRiddlerTHFC 3d ago
Honestly it looked more like it hit a gust of wind as it got above the seating height
19
u/HopeTerminator 4d ago
"straight down" oh piss off it did no such thing. Take your L and move on.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/tsgram 4d ago
What’s the ruling if the ref noticed when it happened? Throw in for England? Drop ball?
→ More replies (8)4
21
u/CrimsonBrit 4d ago
No one saw it on the field. The referee didn’t see it. The fans at home didn’t see. The ball with a microchip inside of it didn’t (see) it.
I’m sorry man but there comes a point that you need to pick another reason for why you lost and move on.
21
→ More replies (4)14
u/Big_Review_8108 4d ago
You didn't watch the game, the goal keeper immediately signaled to the refs and various players. The ref refused to take a look.
→ More replies (3)
9
u/spoonybard326 5d ago
Publish the raw data from the ball chip and see which university’s physics department wants to take a crack at explaining this.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Anothergen 5d ago
There's nothing to really explain. You can see on the footage that the ball never even got close to the height of the wires. The trajectory was normal, it was just a high kick, and Norway fell asleep before the half.
It's all just cope to talk about it.
10
17
u/Mister-Psychology 5d ago
It was the wind. Think about it there are thousands of people recording everything with their phones. The Norwegians would all be putting any video online to show the cable shaking, camera shaking, ball dropping, or even just the position of the cable so that we know it's that low. Where are these videos?
Truth is the ball tends to change direction a bit at times especially all the way up in the wind areas. This is normal for the ball.
→ More replies (15)
14
u/EstimateEvening3243 4d ago
I haven’t seen any evidence that the onscreen chip graph is legitimate. It would be so easy to make up a graph straight line with occasional wavy lines and say “ta-da! No touchy”
→ More replies (3)9
u/devman0 4d ago
What would that evidence look like? It's visualized data? Tha ball doesn't generate the graph itself it's just data.
→ More replies (4)7
u/Decent_Obligation173 4d ago
I can answer that one. I agree with all your points: it's just data on a graph.
The problem is that scale matters and that graph has no scale.
Suppose the sensors are sensitive enough that they would be able to flag if a fly landed on it (or, say, hair strands brushed the ball).
If your chart is built zoomed in enough, you will see the hair strands data show up in it. It your chart is zoomed out enough that it only captures a hand ball or a brush against a players leg, the hair strand brush is too tiny to see in the chart. The ball is sensitive enough to pick it up but your graph doesn't have enough resolution to show it.
Because Fifa didn't release the y axis info, no one trusts that graph. The ball might have hit a wire but they can (and I'm not saying they did but that they have the ability to) hide that event on a zoomed out enough graph.
I'm not saying this would've made Norway win. Maybe England would've won anyway. My entire point is only this: without the raw data, no one will ever trust that graph and the discussion will continue forever without real basis for settlement. A graph without an y axis is not data. It's a story. And we will(rightly so) discuss the story because that's only what they have given us.
13
u/TopManufacturer8332 England 4d ago
Imagine the outrage if VAR spent 10 minutes looking at angles of the fucking sky when they're already getting so much criticism for being extremely pedantic in some of their interventions.
17
u/Special-Audience-426 4d ago
Nobody can provide enough evidence that would disallow the goal after almost 24 hours of the entire internet searching.
Crazy that they still think it should've been disallowed during the game.
→ More replies (1)3
u/felinelawspecialist 4d ago
I think VAR should have a 90-second limit, I mean their remit was supposed to be fixing “clear and obvious errors.” If something takes three or four minutes to determine, it’s neither clear nor obvious.
23
u/sfxer001 USA 5d ago edited 5d ago
American here, so I’m not going to pretend like I know more about *The Soccer* than the euros and South American friends, but as an American we do watch a hell of a lot of our brand of NFL tackle football. Punts, kicks, and sometimes throws hit those guide-wires in our stadiums at least once or twice a season. Field position is so important in NFL football that games have been won or lost because of it, when it’s clear as day to viewers on tv it’s been struck by the ball.
I feel bad for Norway.
5
u/superduperpuppy World Cup 4d ago
I read an American comment in another thread that this stadium has a reputation for strong winds. Is that a thing there?
8
u/ChancelorReed 4d ago
Kansas City is in the middle of the Great Plains and is basically the capital of tornado alley so yes.
8
u/Anglo-fornian 4d ago
How are the winds in Miami tho?
3
u/ChancelorReed 4d ago
Oh right lol. Well also can be windy, also can be totally still and humid air.
→ More replies (4)14
u/Low-Dog-8027 5d ago
i have seen the clip from various angles and could never see it hitting any wire.
but maybe the video quality was just too bad idk.it seems like people in the stadion clearly saw something
→ More replies (23)4
u/d-cent 4d ago
I think the main camera angle, that we keep seeing the highlight of, is a terrible angle for seeing it though.
→ More replies (1)
24
u/BestFriendWatermelon 4d ago
No not everyone... The only people who saw it were people who desperately didn't want to see the ball land at an England player's feet.
Aside from Norway's staff, nobody in the stadium reacted despite 80,000 people watching. No roaring or booing in response to it.
No players have confessed to seeing it themselves from either team.
No camera angle has shown it happening, but plenty have shown nothing.
FIFA released the ball sensor footage which showed no contact. If they faked it but a single camera angle anywhere showed contact, FIFA's reputation would be in tatters.
All this supposed conspiracy to help England through when they could've just disallowed Norway's goal for a foul in the build up or allowed England's penalty to stand.
The ball knuckled as the spin from the goalkeeper's kick wore off. That's it. Without the spin the air resistance dropped the ball out of the sky. You can even see the spin dropping off from the ball sensor line which wobbles up and down.
→ More replies (18)10
u/cyclingthrowaway12 4d ago
I mean the goalkeeper and the coaches immediately reacted so I don't know what you are on about players not confessing...
6
u/QuixoticBeefboy 4d ago
Do you have any evidence of them reacting immediatly, people keep making this claim yet I havent seen a single video of them reacting the moment the ball touched the cable, only after the goal
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)3
•
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Thank you for your submission to r/worldcup. Please remember to read our sub rules, treat your fellow fans with respect, and stay focused on the beautiful game.
Finally, take a closer look at this post regarding our civility rules and reddiquette because we would like for each and everyone to feel welcome on the subreddit and to keep a healthy and safe environment for the community.
Please also make sure to Join us on Discord
Thank you!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.