“I’m sure the ball came out. Absolutely sure. It came out in one piece. And it came out a lot.”
I said this to my father and my son, who were watching the final round of Group E of the Qatar Cup with me.
The move was Japan’s second goal, when, after a “kick” by Doan, Mitoma stretched to try to prevent the ball, which had crossed Spain’s small area, from being lost by the bottom line.
Mitoma threw the ball back into the middle of the small area, where Tanaka was, who pushed it into Unai Simón’s net and turned the game around for the Japanese.
Goal, pointed out the South African referee Victor Gomes, as the linesman scored nothing (and wouldn’t have been able to, given the distance at which he was).
This goal determined the classification of the Asian team for the round of 16. Without him, the result of the match would have been 1 to 1, and Germany, with the triumph by 4 to 2 over Costa Rica, would have been in second place, leaving Japan in third, without a vacancy.
I saw and reviewed the play, and on one of the cameras I was 100% sure that the ball went out. All. Without a doubt. Scandalously.
A crass mistake by the referee in confirming the goal, and I thought to myself, saving the family members from repeating to them what I considered obvious: “It’s not possible that they didn’t cancel the goal”.
Why was the goal retained? Because technology wanted it that way. Technology rules, it owns the truth, and technology ensures that the ball did not go out.
It should be noted that, according to the rule, the ball must completely cross the line, in all its circumference, to be considered out of play.
“Slow-motion footage revealed that Mitoma had kicked the ball before it completed its rotation into touch,” FIFA said on its website about the move, praising the accuracy of the VAR (video assistant referees).
The VAR in Japan vs Spain was the Mexican Fernando Guerrero. If you saw the shot from the same camera that I saw it, it’s impossible that you didn’t think the ball went out.
He must have had access to some image that did not reach the public or the media, an image (and I would very much like to see it) that shows that, by millimeters, the round did not completely cross the bottom line.
Mm. This is the point. What’s right is right, and if the ball doesn’t come out in one piece, even by millimeters, the goal was legal, there’s nothing to complain about.
There is, yes, to conform. Human eyes are no longer able to correctly read a play without the help of technology – the various impediments marked (or unmarked) in the Cup by her intervention are proof of that.
The machine has beaten the man. A crushing victory, a rout, 7 to 1 or more.
Maybe that’s a good thing, but I’m left with a touch of sadness, knowing that my eyes –and certainly not just mine, but the vast majority of people’s eyes– are no longer as capable as I thought they were.
I accept the verdict, it is final, there is nothing to be done.
But, since I was defeated, let the image of defeat be made public by Fifa. The same one that VAR saw to guide the referee to confirm Japan’s goal. My eyes deserve it.
As a seasoned news journalist, I bring a wealth of experience to the field. I’ve worked with world-renowned news organizations, honing my skills as a writer and reporter. Currently, I write for the sports section at News Bulletin 247, where I bring a unique perspective to every story.
