The United States are out of the Copa America they are hosting this summer after losing 1-0 to Uruguay in their final group match on Monday — but Mathias Olivera’s goal was controversial.
Olivera slotted home in the 66th minute after Ronald Araujo’s initial header was saved by Matt Turner. But some angles seemed to suggest Napoli left-back Olivera was offside in the build-up to the goal, which was upheld, to American dismay, after a VAR review.
CONMEBOL, the South American football federation whose regional championship this tournament is despite the 2024 edition being played in the States, has now released video and audio of the review process.
So what happened, and how did the officials come to the decision to let Olivera’s effort stand?
IFAB, the body that sets the laws of football worldwide, states a player is offside if any part of their head, body or feet is nearer to the opponent’s goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent. A player is not offside if they are level with the second-last opponent, or the last two opponents.
In the 65th minute of Monday’s match at Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City, Missouri, Uruguay were awarded a free kick after a foul by Giovanni Reyna on their right-back, Nahitan Nandez. From that set piece, attacking midfielder Nicolas de la Cruz swung in a ball that Araujo headed towards goal. Turner saved that first effort but could not keep out Olivera’s follow-up.
The first angle of the goal shows the moment De la Cruz puts in the cross — with one Uruguay player seemingly offside on the far side of play. Ecuadorian video assistant referee (VAR), Carlos Orbe, asks to see the “point of contact” and says, “I want to see who plays it”, referring to Araujo. The Peruvian on-field referee, Kevin Ortega, can be heard saying, “Possible offside, but we are checking — OK? Thank you.”
Orbe asks to see a close-up of the initial contact, which appears to show Olivera straying into an offside position behind the USMNT defence. One of the VAR team says it is “completely fine”.
As the video switches to another angle, Ortega says that the “second action”, where Olivera scores, is “tight”. Ecuadorian assistant VAR Bryan Loayza confirms they are checking the “penalty area situation” for a possible offside.
The VAR officials begin to draw up two lines to determine whether Olivera was offside at the point of Araujo’s header. They place a horizontal blue line across the pitch, in line with U.S. defender Chris Richards’ left boot, and a vertical red one in line with Olivera’s knee.
“We are checking, OK, it’s possible,” Ortega says in English down on the pitch.
Loayza says they will need “more time” and asks Ortega to signal that. A single blue line shows that Richards’ foot — or toe — is in line with Olivera’s knee. Orbe says, “this is an overlie (overlap) and it’s fine”.
Orbe then says that the “second situation is fine, I’m about to revise the first one”, as he is shown the first angle of De la Cruz’s ball into the box.
“The second one has been checked, we’re going to do the first one (involving) Araujo,” Ortega says on the pitch, in Spanish. Another blue line is drawn across the pitch for the moment the cross comes in, zooming in on a cluster of players to make sure it is drawn from any body part they could legally score with.
Ortega can be heard saying, “It’s very tight, it’s very tight! They’re drawing the lines.”
Orbe says this angle — in line with the goal — is the “best one”, and the lines are drawn again for Araujo’s header. The horizontal blue one is placed in line with Richards’ foot and the vertical red one is placed in line with Olivera’s knee. Loayza tells the on-field referee that they are “two tight situations”.
Orbe confirms that he can see an overlap on both angles, meaning Olivera is not offside. He asks for the video to be played on, to show the moment Olivera scores and confirms it is a goal with Ortega. “The two situations are tight, but they’re onside,” the VAR says.
The final result meant the U.S. were unable to match or better Panama’s 3-1 win against Bolivia in the other Group C game happening at the same time in Orlando, Florida, and so finished third, with only the top two advancing to the knockout rounds.
But their complaints about Ortega — who made several strange decisions during the match — are unlikely to go away.
(Top photo: Shaun Clark/Getty Images)
Source link : https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5611624/2024/07/02/uruguays-controversial-winning-goal-usmnt-explained/
Author :
Publish date : 2024-07-02 16:03:45
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
