OT: The 2026 World Cup Thread

[XLIX]

FIFA has released the video/ball sensor output. It shows no deviation. I see no reason to not take them at their word. Why do you believe that there is some sort of conspiracy at work here? They would have to have fabricated the data. That seems implausible, whatever your personal animosity to them is.

Don't ever change, my sweet summer child! Bless your heart!!

 

[wynpalmer]

Because flopping is part of the game.

Everytime the ball is in traffic players are hitting the ground.

This is somewhat of a non-sequitur, is it not. You would have to conjure a very specific set of circumstances out of the general perception that you have of the game.
Let's look at the NFL analogy. Although not exact, holding/interference of one sort or another is ubiquitous, particularly in Line play, but is not always called. Would you like every potential call, no matter how incidental, or "trivial" called? Would you like the refs to keep a running total of some kind or another and apply the concept of "fairness"?
Refs are human. Football (sorry, soccer) has very few officials for a daunting task. VAR has gone a long way towards correcting the sins of old, and if properly applied- according to the rules- actually makes things much fairer, and far less arbitrary, in my opinion.

 

[wynpalmer]

Don't ever change, my sweet summer child! Bless your heart!!

I'm a retired IC engineer, with a PhD and with many years spent in engineering ending up as a Senior Fellow- the highest ranking in engineering- in a large world-wide analog/mixed signal company. I have a deep respect for the technology involved. I also live in the Carolinas, so the Bless your Heart (dumb as hell) statement is not appropriate or appreciated.

I'm also British and a fan of Leeds United and Rangers FC- both of which are owned and managed by 49rs Enterprises. I understand the subtleties of the game, and I've followed its tactical, physical and technological evolution from the early 1970s onwards to the present era.

 

[Brandon_Cox]

Did that SWS player deserve a red card?

Nope, he deserved a yellow card, which is what he got. Unfortunately for him, he already had a yellow from earlier in the game, so he got tossed.

BTW, for those of us who hate flopping, that's exactly what he did: he pretended the Argentina player tripped him and went flying and then rolling around the pitch in fake pain. He got what he deserved.

 

[Gumby]

FIFA has released the video/ball sensor output. It shows no deviation. I see no reason to not take them at their word. Why do you believe that there is some sort of conspiracy at work here? They would have to have fabricated the data. That seems implausible, whatever your personal animosity to them is.

Why do you believe that NEW TECHNOLOGY being implemented in the FIRST TIME in a major fifa tournament is INFALLIBLE?????

The Blue Origin rocket made it all the way to orbit on its test flight. Pay no attention to the video of it exploding.

This same technology identified ball movement from brushing a hairdo and less than 2 seconds later registered 0 impetus change from a player hitting it back across the goal face as an assist to whar WOULD HAVE BEEN A TIE, but the brushing hair made it offsides and disallowed. All good for the fifa favorites. Amazing how these weird technological events always favor the Arg, Eng, Spa (favs and rating magnets) and the SUI and Belgians etc can go home.

 

[XLIX]

I'm a retired IC engineer, with a PhD and with many years spent in engineering ending up as a Senior Fellow- the highest ranking in engineering- in a large world-wide analog/mixed signal company.

Good for you! I'm a human being with 2 eyes that can see a clear direction change of the ball.

I have a deep respect for the technology involved. I also live in the Carolinas, so the Bless your Heart (dumb as hell) statement is not appropriate or appreciated.

Well, coming from deep in the heart of Texas, bless your heart!!

I'm also British

And I am an American. So, unlike you, I don't have a dog in the race. Thank you for admitting you're biased.

and a fan of Leeds United and Rangers FC- both of which are owned and managed by 49rs Enterprises. I understand the subtleties of the game, and I've followed its tactical, physical and technological evolution from the early 1970s onwards to the present era.

Your pathetic attempt to pull rank is laughable. This isn't about "the subtleties of the game". This is about whether object A collided with object B. The video I posted proves it beyond any doubt whatsoever.

 

[wynpalmer]

Nope, he deserved a yellow card, which is what he got. Unfortunately for him, he already had a yellow from earlier in the game, so he got tossed.

BTW, for those of us who hate flopping, that's exactly what he did: he pretended the Argentina player tripped him and went flying and then rolling around the pitch in fake pain. He got what he deserved.

Thank you. For some reason many commenters just don't seem to make the connection between the specific set of events and the outcome.
The critical aspects are.
1. The Argentine was given a yellow card for what looked like a serious foul on Embolo. This decision was based on Embolo's behavior- leaping in the air, then clutching his shin and writhing on the ground for an extended peiod of time.
2. VAR showed that there was no contact prior to Embolo's behavior. This meant that the foul was simulated.
3. Simulation has a very specific consequence when a player is given a yellow card. It results in the award of a "mistaken identity" infraction and the transfer of the card to the simulator. The yellow cannot be rescinded, as per law, and the simulation cannot be treated as a separate offence. SO, Embolo got a yellow.
4. This was Embolo's 2nd yellow in the game. As per law, this is equivalent to a Red card, which was then given to Embolo.

Diving per se. was not the reason for Embolo's expulsion. That's why no other somewhat similar events resulted in the transference of yellows. In the USA Paraguay match a USA player was also mistakenly issued a yellow card for a foul that looked bad, but VAR correctly diagnosed it as simulation and the yellow was switched to the Paraguay player. He was not sent off because he did not have a prior yellow.
The refs seem to be consistently applying this rule.

 

[wynpalmer]

Good for you! I'm a human being with 2 eyes that can see a clear direction change of the ball.

Well, coming from deep in the heart of Texas, bless your heart!!

And I am an American. So, unlike you, I don't have a dog in the race. Thank you for admitting you're biased.

Your pathetic attempt to pull rank is laughable. This isn't about "the subtleties of the game". This is about whether object A collided with object B. The video I posted proves it beyond any doubt whatsoever.

No, it does not. Your lack of technical knowledge is apparent. Perhaps you should self-apply the "bless your heart" epithet.
Learn something about accelerometers, perhaps General Relativity, and the application of logic. as well, while you're at it.

Why does my being a fan of British football teams have anything to do with the facts of the matter. Which particular dog is in this race?
Videos are difficult to use for proof under these circumstances- perspective etc.
This circumstance is EXACTLY why the accelerometer was included in the balls.
What dog do you have in this that makes an objective piece of evidence be less acceptable than a subjective one?
What is so hard to understand that collisions NECESSARILY produce acceleration?
Ever heard of Newton's third law of motion? It seems not. Perhaps you should look it up, then you might, just might, understand why the accelerometer is a definitive arbiter of the collision and not your eyeballs.

Americans!
Europeans think that you love your conspiracy theories. Sometimes you're right, but it seems highly improbable that is the case in this instance.
In any case. I'm through with this exchange. I have no desire to invoke the ire of the mods.

 

[wynpalmer]

Why do you believe that NEW TECHNOLOGY being implemented in the FIRST TIME in a major fifa tournament is INFALLIBLE?????

The Blue Origin rocket made it all the way to orbit on its test flight. Pay no attention to the video of it exploding.

This same technology identified ball movement from brushing a hairdo and less than 2 seconds later registered 0 impetus change from a player hitting it back across the goal face as an assist to whar WOULD HAVE BEEN A TIE, but the brushing hair made it offsides and disallowed. All good for the fifa favorites. Amazing how these weird technological events always favor the Arg, Eng, Spa (favs and rating magnets) and the SUI and Belgians etc can go home.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could direct me to a video that showed the exact sequence that you describe. The videos that I have seen terminate the display of the accelerometer prior to the player hitting it back across the goal.
For example,

Why Croatia goal didn't count vs. Portugal. Complicated World Cup offside rule explained

In the hectic final minutes of the Croatia vs. Portugal World Cup round of 32 match, a controversial call negated a potential equalizer. Here's why

www.usatoday.com

 

[XLIX]

No, it does not. Your lack of technical knowledge is apparent. Perhaps you should self-apply the "bless your heart" epithet.
Learn something about accelerometers, perhaps General Relativity, and the application of logic. as well, while you're at it.

The accelerometers are not even remotely reliable, as proven above. Whether you've been watching soccer 30 years or 30 days does not matter in the slightest. It is both pathetic and laughable that you think credentials matter one iota in this case.

Even a 6 year old - which you coincidentally display the mindset of - understands the argument. Any unbiased fan (which you admit you are not) can see a clear direction change of the ball in the air. That's Newton's 3rd Law on display right there. Only an outside force acting on the ball would change its motion.

Unless one argues there are invisible birds flying around, the logic you so desperately want us to apply proves that the ball hit the wire.

Oh and by the way.... bless your heart!

 

[Gumby]

I would greatly appreciate it if you could direct me to a video that showed the exact sequence that you describe. The videos that I have seen terminate the display of the accelerometer prior to the player hitting it back across the goal.
For example,

Why Croatia goal didn't count vs. Portugal. Complicated World Cup offside rule explained

In the hectic final minutes of the Croatia vs. Portugal World Cup round of 32 match, a controversial call negated a potential equalizer. Here's why

www.usatoday.com

Sorry, not that much into soccer to chase your white whales for you.
(aside: And that they cut it off right there isn’t a sign all by itself. ????)

All I know is the post game broadcast I was watching, either bspn.uk or German ARD broadcasters (not exactly neophyte soccer dudes & not partisan to CRO or POR) said that was what the accelerometer showed. I do not watch broadcasts that show that graphic, so I have no first hand knowledge, but trusted the source at time I heard it.

BL: to say the tech is not foolproof, doesn’t seem a terribly outrageous proposition. You on the other hand are asserting perfection and that you can trust FIFA. lol.

 

[wynpalmer]

Ai generated (and checked by me)
FIFA’s "Connected Ball Technology" relies on a suspended 14-gram sensor core containing accelerometers and gyroscopes. These boards capture linear acceleration and rotation up to 500 times per second. This creates exact timestamps for player touches, enabling Video Assistant Referees (VAR) and semi-automated offside decisions in milliseconds. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
To ensure these boards, batteries, and sensors can survive the extreme impacts of professional football, FIFA and Adidas rely on an extensive, multi-phase testing and certification protocol:

Robotic Impact Testing
Before approval for tournament play, balls are subjected to rigorous robotic testing facilities. Adidas uses specialized robotic legs to kick and strike the balls against hard surfaces thousands of times. This process ensures the 500 Hz motion sensors can continuously handle the forces a human player generates without failing or misaligning.

Sensor Suspension System
The sensor board cannot simply be glued to the inside of the ball, as this would affect the ball's weight distribution and balance. During the research and development phases, FIFA tested various suspension systems. Modern accelerometer boards are suspended perfectly in the center of the ball on specialized tethers. This design protects the micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) from heavy impacts while ensuring the ball's center of gravity remains perfectly balanced. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Calibration & Broadcast Integration Testing
Before every major FIFA competition, the FIFA Innovation team performs stadium tests. During these trials, the accelerometer data is calibrated against multiple stadium tracking cameras. This ensures that the linear acceleration "spike" generated when a player's boot hits the ball is perfectly synchronized with the optical camera feeds and semi-automated offside AI. [1, 2, 3]

Durability & Environmental Stress Testing
Because the sensor units now house wireless inductive charging receivers and internal batteries, FIFA subjects the electronic boards to extreme environmental testing. Testing phases include subjecting the boards to extreme heat, cold, and humidity to ensure the lithium-ion power sources remain stable and pose no risk during gameplay. [1, 2, 3, 4]

 

[wynpalmer]

Sorry, not that much into soccer to chase your white whales for you.
(aside: And that they cut it off right there isn’t a sign all by itself. ????)

All I know is the post game broadcast I was watching, either bspn.uk or German ARD broadcasters (not exactly neophyte soccer dudes & not partisan to CRO or POR) said that was what the accelerometer showed. I do not watch broadcasts that show that graphic, so I have no first hand knowledge, but trusted the source at time I heard it.

BL: to say the tech is not foolproof, doesn’t seem a terribly outrageous proposition. You on the other hand are asserting perfection and that you can trust FIFA. lol.

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The accelerometers are designed and tested for high levels of reliability and have proven themselves to be so, both in use and under extreme testing conditions.
FIFA also used them in the 2022 World cup and in a number of subsequent FIFA tournaments. There have been no confirmed failures of the system (as far as I can find) just a number of commentator driven controversies concerning the correlation of the eyeball test and the device, particularly during the 2026 World Cup.
UEFA also use them for semi-automated offside technology. The technology was used in the 2024 EURO competitions.
The premier League also uses the technology.

Just for your consideration. Similar MEMS devices are used in spacecraft, weapons systems, aircraft etc. etc. where extreme reliabillty and guaranteed performance under stringent environmental conditions and extreme accelerations are essential attributes. By these standards the inside of a soccer ball is a very benign environment indeed.

 

[XLIX]

The BBC technology confirms what we all already knew: It hit the wire.

 

[wynpalmer]

The BBC technology confirms what we all already knew: It hit the wire.

Read the comments. They say it all. Using an antiquated technology to second guess a new technology that has demonstrably better performance is- well, weird.

 

[XLIX]

Read the comments. They say it all. Using an antiquated technology to second guess a new technology that has demonstrably better performance is- well, weird.

There are few things more pathetic than someone saying "I am done with this exchange" and then jumping right back in when someone proves they are wrong.

The BBC's 3D technology is not "antiquated". It is a proven technology and far more reliable than something invented a couple hours ago. FIFA's accelerometers were never meant to track a ball 100 feet in the air. All the sensors (and the cameras, which are a necessary component) are pointing at the field. It is not even remotely unrealistic to suggest this brand new technology simply missed something it wasn't designed to track.

Thinking that every England soccer fan is right and THE REST OF THE ENTIRE WORLD is wrong is- well, weird.