LogFAQs > #955903104

Also I need to rant about this fucking Sterling thing - not aimed at anybody here, especially not ctes, who has been way better about this whole thing than I would have been, just at the general reaction to the incident

In 66 England won (at least in part) because the ball didn't cross the line for the 3rd goal. In 86 Maradona punched it in. Those are objective refereeing errors. This was just down to judgement. The Danish players miss the ball and there's contact on Sterling (by two different players, in fact). It is totally valid to say Sterling had lost control of the ball, or the contact was not sufficient to inhibit him, etc. Not all contact is a foul, after all. It's also completely fair to say it was one though because no replay can give us an idea of Sterling's exact speed or balance in that moment, the effect of the contact on his body.

VAR looked at it and at least decided that it wasn't not a penalty. The rules for an incident like that are at the mercy of interpretation and we shouldn't pretend otherwise.

This is more akin to the Campbell disallowed goal in 98 (or Lampard's in 2004). That wasn't a travesty of justice. There's a clear case to be made that Shearer fouled the Argentinian goalkeeper off the ball. That doesn't mean you have to agree but there's validity to the argument either way.

People complaining about this have put it alongside the hand of god, acting like it's that level of travesty, and it's just... not. That's how history will judge it; soft, very soft even, but ultimately giveable and justifiable, especially in the current context of how fouls are being judged. It's totally fine to disagree, but don't pretend it's anything more than mere disagreement. This was not a player punching it in, this was not a goal being given despite not crossing the line, this was a defender missing the ball and making contact with the attacker who has every right to go down at that moment.

It's a danger of VAR to treat incidents as black and white. It's not a one size fits all saving grace to fix refereeing "mistakes" forever; many incidents are still at the mercy of subjective interpretation by the ref because the laws of the game mean it's impossible for that not to be the case.

I'm not saying Danish fans (or whoever wanted Denmark to win) shouldn't feel aggrieved, and I won't lie: I'm obviously more invested in this than I normally would be. It's just a mistake to present this as a huge travesty. This was not Denmark's hand of god - that's wildly overstating things. And if you're drawing a line between those two things - as I expect most b8ers would - then there's no issue.

My stance here is basically: I'm not saying it absolutely was a penalty, but I'm not saying it absolutely was not a penalty. It's in kind of a grey area, at the mercy of subjective interpretation, and the VAR decided the ref wasn't factually, obviously wrong.

tl;dr: by all means feel shitty about this; I would if it happened to England, but a distinction needs to be made between this and genuine, indisputable travesties.

---

Not to be confused with XIII_stones.
https://imgur.com/agodP3r