RMA

@Vargentinanet nah ur not getting a follow

Every controversial decision gets a trial. The jury is the internet. Follow the tribunal ⚖️

@KhaledHossam206 @ExtremeBlitz__ hes washed

@ExtremeBlitz__ This doesn’t work when he beat spain in a nations league final

Tried staying up for 24 hours to fix my sleep schedule and fell asleep at 2pm

@JackMeowfff @TouchmineX none of this happened except for the red card

@TouchmineX Why watch it? We already know the story : - penalty for Argentina - red card for other team - no yellow cards or red cards for Argentina - other teams scores … VAR will step in and cancel out the goal

🚨📺 𝗕𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗞𝗜𝗡𝗚: Argentina vs. Switzerland became the least-watched match of the knockout stage, according to multiple reports. 🇦🇷🇨🇭 It is believed that the kickoff time was inconvenient for European viewers and fell in the early morning for many in Asia. Some also believe interest was affected by the ongoing AFA and FIFA controversy reports, with many expecting the perceived favoritism toward Argentina to continue. 😳📉

@SoulKingZero4 @lamineraa give the link for first image

@lamineraa Cope

Friendly reminder that although Portugal didn’t win France and England are still in the competition and can both make the final Been on Portugal, France, England for over a year

@BlockIfTheyThem @HotTakesOnly90 How old you are if you think that name will change anything? You're the one who made an alt to harass me. This kind of thing only works on edgy 10 year olds

@thatsmeglen1 @BlockIfTheyThem @HotTakesOnly90 @appiecule just go on with ur day 🤣

@BlockIfTheyThem @MRAlordwar @HotTakesOnly90 @appiecule And what caused the wrongly called foul on parades ? The dive from embolo, there was no foul committed by parades, just a simulation from embolo to get him a card

A very brave decision, but 100% the correct one. The law already allows this. In situations involving a second yellow card that could result in a dismissal, VAR is permitted to intervene when the caution stems from a reviewable incident—as happened here. Embolo had already been booked for his reckless challenge on Paredes. He then deliberately simulated a foul, prompting VAR to intervene. After reviewing the incident, the referee rescinded Paredes’ yellow card and instead showed Embolo a second yellow for simulation, followed by a red card. It was the correct refereeing decision, and the officiating team deserves credit for having the courage to make it. 👏🏼

@BlockIfTheyThem @thatsmeglen1 @HotTakesOnly90 @appiecule nope

@thatsmeglen1 @MRAlordwar @HotTakesOnly90 @appiecule You are completely missing the definition of the word identity. The offence cannot be reviewed. IFAB's words, not mine. The offence is what the whistle is blown for. The whistle was blown for a foul by Paredes. Nothing else is relevant here.

@BlockIfTheyThem @HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule There was a foul, Embolo dived.

@MRAlordwar @HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Your point is that there was no foul... and anyone who saw the incident would agree that there was no foul. Embolo dived. No one is being disingenuous. No one has said he didn't dive. The point is, the dive is wholly irrelevant. Do you know what the word "identity" means?

@BlockIfTheyThem @HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule But it didn't cease to exist. VAR reviewed in USA match and Argentina match and they both concluded that a dive has occured and the foul must be given to a different player.

@MRAlordwar @HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule That IS what you are saying. There are two offence in question. 1. the foul by paredes, 2. the dive. The referee awarded the foul by paredes. That means the ONLY offence in question is the foul by paredes. The dive effectively ceases to exist

@BlockIfTheyThem @HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Ahh I apologise. Either way, there was no VAR mistake with USA vs Paraguay and Argentina vs Switzerland.

@MRAlordwar @HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule "not what website you're using" and its literally the IFAB website 🤣🤣🤣 The wrong player didnt get the card the wrong foul was given. That is the entire issue you absolute moron

@BlockIfTheyThem @HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Paredes was wrongly shown a yellow when the offence was committed by Embolo.

@MRAlordwar @HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule You showing the rules and not being able to understand simple English doesn't prove anything. The reviewable issue is solely related to identity. The question that can be asked by VAR is who did the thing, not what thing was done.

@thatsmeglen1 @BlockIfTheyThem @HotTakesOnly90 @appiecule No point in arguing with him he already lost when he made an alt account. I didn't know he supported Trump either 🧐

@HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule If there was no actual foul then why did Embolo get the yellow? Did you even see the clip of him diving like a moron? If you're going to keep being disengenous then I'll have to block you sadly. You're arguing on feelings and I'm showing you the rules. Embolo committed the foul.

@MRAlordwar @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule I've said this to you several times. It does not matter that there was no actual foul. The referee gave a foul. That means there was a foul. The rule only allows for checking who committed the foul. I'm not arguing against what the rule says. I'm telling you what it says

@HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Yes exactly. The wrong player got yellow card, that's the mistaken identity. The exact same thing happened in USA vs Paraguay. The referees surely know more than you. Please go to IFAB to look at the rules and not what website you're uding using. Embolo committed the foul.

@MRAlordwar @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule

@HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Educate yourself please. theifab.com/law-changes/la…

@MRAlordwar @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule VAR should not have reviewed. The rule is in place to prevent a booking the wrong player because of mistaken identity. There is no rule that allows VAR to intervene because the referee made a wrong decision on a regular foul

@HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule You're the one who can't read. This is literally from theifab you can't argue against it. Paredes didn't make ANY tackle lol it was a clear dive.

@MRAlordwar @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule You cannot read. "The offence" is the tackle, not the dive. Paredes made the tackle. The rules are very clear. The offence should not get reviewed, only the person who did it. If the ref made the wrong call but with the correct players, VAR should not intervene.

@HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule You are very wrong. This is a new rule so I understand your confusion This already happened before in a previous match. I don't understand what your point is. Are you saying that VAR shouldn't have reviewed it? Or are you just arguing over the over the word "mistaken identity"?

@thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Ok cool does not matter. The only thing that can be reviewed is identity. Not what actually happened.

@HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule VAR are allowed to reviw the offence. This screenshot proves you wrong.

@MRAlordwar @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Mistaken identity, not mistaken offence. VAR is not supposed to review the offence itself. Paredes committed what the ref saw as a foul. There was no mistaken identity.

@HotTakesOnly90 @thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Paredes got the yellow but it was a mistake, Embolo should have gotten it instead

@thatsmeglen1 @appiecule Paredes committed the foul. Paredes was shown a yellow card. At what point was the identity of the player mistaken?