Why VAR Ruled Ecuador's Goal OFFSIDE | Explained

Enner Valencia scored three goals for Ecuador in their 2-0 win over Qatar at the FIFA 2022 World Cup but his first goal was disallowed. Why did VAR rule that Ecuador's first goal was offside? If you're looking for a clear explanation, we've got you covered with this video.
We hope you enjoy the video and welcome your comments below. Don't forget to subscribe!
FREE eBook 'Effective Communication for Referees' - www.pauljspacey.com/ebooks
#offside #worldcup2022 #ecuador
----------
Chapters:
0:00 Intro
0:13 Why Is It Offside?
0:44 IFAB Laws
1:02 Slow-motion Replay
1:31 Crazy But Correct
----------
The Ecuador national football team represents Ecuador in men's international football and is controlled by the Ecuadorian Football Federation. They joined FIFA in 1926 and CONMEBOL a year later.
referee
VAR
offside
ecuador disallowed goal
Qatar world cup 2022
enner valencia goal
ecuador offside
explanation
match officials
Fifa
laws of the game

[@josana.pictures]

I would agree with your explanation but it appears that the goalie punched the ball a split second after the Ecuadorian player headed the ball causing it to go strait up 90 degrees to the grass field, thus the opponent player touched it before the Ecuadorian player number 11 touched it. If I am correct and I believe I am this was not the right call and it was a legitimate goal. Estoy de acuerdo con su explicación, pero parece que el portero golpeó la pelota una fracción de segundo después de que el jugador ecuatoriano cabeceó la pelota y la hizo subir 90 grados hacia el campo de césped, por lo que el jugador oponente la tocó antes que el jugador ecuatoriano número 11 lo tocó. Si estoy en lo correcto y creo que lo estoy, esta no fue la decisión correcta y fue un gol legítimo.

[@Bruhstorfer]

This is exciting...as a youth coach, I have been entrenched in learning offsides to teach to my 8yr olds for the last 12mos. I believe what makes this confusing is the lack of a clear angle showing the position of the players (The Keeper and #2 are in a false position on the screen since they are in the air and they appear further ahead than they are). If #2 touches the ball as it lands before #11 touches it with his head [or #11 never touches the ball at all], this is not offsides.

[@PaulSpacey]

spot on Bob; great point and analysis. The angles make it more confusing but I guess that is determined by the positions of the cameras around the stadiums, so the angle is rarely perfectly in line with the incident. I might be wrong about this.

[@jardinuk]

The law states: A player is in an offside position if: any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent The key part being that they have to be closer to the goal than BOTH the ball and the second last opponent. He is clearly behind the ball and therefore not offside.

[@PaulSpacey]

#11 is ahead of the ball when #2 makes contact with it.

[@jardinuk]

@@PaulSpacey No he isn't. 😂

[@twanvanderdonk2504]

@@jardinuk Yes, he is. His foot is clearly behind the goalkeeper, which is where the ball is. That's the reference point. His foot is ahead of the ball and the second last opponent.

[@jardinuk]

@@twanvanderdonk2504 At 18 -20 seconds in to the video, when number 2 heads it, number 11 is clearly behind the ball.

[@twanvanderdonk2504]

@@jardinuk No, that is the camera angle and number 11 and the keeper jumping that makes it look that way. It's an optical illusion.

[@mikebrandenburg9922]

A clear explanation, however the fact that at no point is shown an image where it is clear the ball went in a forward movent or if it went backward or even stayed at the same level as wehere it was played, de perfect angle is form the side but nowhere do they show the game being played or set still form that angle. When we can not clearly determine if the bal was played toward the goal we can not see if it was offside. We constntly get the angle from wehre we can not see the bal going forward or backward, you want to be clear show the best camera angle, and when you freeze the game in a beautifill animation, you should freeze the bal with a view of the entire situation. I do like the attempt to clarification but when we refuse to use the cameras with perfect view you keep having the doubt. Well those who think for themselves will.

[@PaulSpacey]

Your point would be correct Mike if the LOTG were written that way but the ball does NOT have to go forward for offside to be called. The player just needs to be in an offside position at the time the ball is played. Harry Kane's Champions League goal was disallowed for offside and yet the ball was headed backwards by his teammate.

[@mikebrandenburg9922]

@@PaulSpacey let's agree to disagree, as the rules have always been very clear, you can only be in an offside position if the balm is played forward, if any part of your body except your hand offside but the ball is not pushed forward it is according to the rules not offside. You can walking back from an offside position, and pick up a ball which is not passed forward. The rules are extremely clear about that, if the ball like here goes up and doesn't move forward and this player with his legg offside takes the bal it is not offside. If the ball only goes forward one inch he would be. For this reason it is important to have a camera with clear view from the side. A ball not played forward can not create an offside situation, specially as in this instance where the free kick is taken en there are four players of the opponent team are between the attackers and the goal. Maybe they have changed the rule before this event, but I don't believe that happened, if you can not determine the ball is played forward it is not offside.

[@_Super_Hans_]

Thanks for the clarification. The broadcasters covering really should have taken a ref with them to explain unclear decisions like this as they clearly didn't have a clue what was going on in the studio. I think this technology could be great in England and rule out any arguments as long as it's clearly explained and consistent, like goal line technology it's not open to interpretation, it's either on or off. As long as all teams are judged to the same standard there is no problem. A big problem with the coverage on this at the time was that it took about 10 minutes for them to put the animation on the screen, even then it was still unclear. They desperately need to get more refs involved in coverage in all competitions.

[@PaulSpacey]

Agreed Hans; it would be massively helpful for referees to give input so that on TV it can be immediately explained. Fox Sports in the US do this with an ex-referee. The clarification would help to stop (or at least lessen) the constant incorrect moaning and discussion by commentators, pundits and fans.

[@Spinachlover-wv3yo]

This goal would’ve given Enner Valencia a hat trick, the fastest goal in a world cup opening match and the best ranked country not to qualify for the knockout stage

[@PaulSpacey]

👏

[@Dmagicsinthebucket]

When Ecuador kicks the free kick nobody is offside, the offside rule supposedly always counted when the ball leaves the players foot, on this case they are saying the reception/receiving the ball is offside, but the kick is clearly correctly onside.

[@forshawxwilson2159]

The player who received the ball from the free kick isn’t the player who was deemed offside. It was the first touch after the free kick which mean the second player was offside as he was the next to touch it. (Second touch after the free kick)

[@PaulSpacey]

spot on Forshaw, thanks for the clarification.

[@thejackoss]

Why was the offside position counted at the moment the player touched the ball, and not at the moment the previous player touched it? Shouldn’t the offside position only considered at the moment of the pass by another player?

[@PaulSpacey]

It was counted when the previous player touched it (#2) but at that point #11 isn’t directly involved in the play. Once he is the next player to touch the ball, he becomes involved and gains an advantage (technically) by being in that original offside position. Being offside is not an offense unless you then become involved in that particular phase of play. It can be confusing but that’s how the LOTG are written and applied.

[@pease951]

@@PaulSpacey ok, great explanation. Now do one for today's disallowed offsides goal where the Ecuadorian player in an offside position was not involved in the play.

[@joelnunez9554]

I think offside should be called when a player is kicking the ball towards the box. In this play, when the ball was kicked towards the box, the players were onside. If players are fighting for a rebound from the goalie and a player gets into a better position inside the box and then scores, the offside should not be called. Just like it's not called when there's a corner kick. The problem is this play is not that the player if offside, it's that the rules should be changed. Same thing with Argentina's disallowed goals, Messi and Martinezs feet were both onside, but they were leaning forward. I think the rules in that case should apply with the feet, not the shoulder or body. Rules need to be changed, it's that simple.

[@dimitrab3324]

The keepers butt looks to be parallel with #11s foot at 29s of your video. Do both defenders that keep an attacking play onside have to have both feet planted on the ground? I realize the keeper is in the air but his butt looks to be keeping #11 onside.

[@PaulSpacey]

Good point. No, feet don't have to be planted on the ground and the keepers butt would count as part of his body for the purposes of offside. In frame 0:29 which you mention, the camera angle is slightly off compared to the angle used by VAR for the still shot, so the keepers butt is slightly ahead of #11.

[@un_ubcribed]

So it shouldn't be offside then?

[@CornPopWazABadDude]

Why doesn't the animation show where the GK is at that exact moment? It takes him out, why?

[@Metalpazallteway]

Technical issues

[@fathin21]

1:17 it's the key why VAR say offside. Nobody touch the ball

[@PaulSpacey]

exactly.

[@s.a.1555]

It is not understood why they used the defender as the last man that would enable, when the goalkeeper is even closer to the goal. In that case the goalkeeper would be the last to enable. They should compare the 11 against the goalie. The same thing happened in the offside charge against Argentina.

[@Metalpazallteway]

The more important question here is why was Mexico's third goal considered offside when he was definitely not offside due to Center Backs left leg in the game yesterday. Also, in the Qatar penultimate game with Senegal, why was that considered not a penalty when there was a clear leg rub from the center back on number 11? Where was the VAR in these games?

[@Metalpazallteway]

References: Mexico v Saudí Arabia, and Senegal v Qatar

[@PaulSpacey]

and these are the legitimate complaints made by fans, coaches and players. Inconsistency. Some decisions are still 'subjective' even taking into account clear guidance and the laws of the game. Referees and VAR officials still have to make some decisions which are based on their opinion and interpretation. It's not 100% foolproof.

[@Metalpazallteway]

@@PaulSpacey Then I guess the beautiful game is still on an ongoing process? since VAR has finite technology but is still at the expense of human intervention.

[@un_ubcribed]

But was the graphic comparing the offside measured from the wrong point? It looks like the goalkeeper is further back than the defender so the point of reference should have been the part of the keeper closest to the goal and not the defender's leg.

[@PaulSpacey]

the GK isn't further back, that's just the camera angle and the fact he is off the ground is probably misleading. The defender is the correct reference point here.

[@robinweber9640]

@@PaulSpacey bs

[@lil001100]

It is very confusion, but I believe your judgement. Anyway offside is the most confusion call. Thanks.

[@jaybrower7200]

Could you find a more grainy picturee of number 2 touching the ball? How are you so sure it wasn't the keeper with his arms extended over number 2's head?

[@PaulSpacey]

Watch a clearer clip and you’ll see it. You can’t use FIFA clips because of copyright, that’s why this one was used.

[@robinweber9640]

@@PaulSpacey you're trying so hard to lick those boots aren't you?

[@sowhat...]

@@PaulSpacey what are FIFA clips? Where is this clip from if not FIFA? I mean aren't they all FIFA? I don't think it's from a random amateur fan's cam.

[@Chundi23]

It’s all damage control for a shitty call. Host country gets embarrassed within 2 minutes of start of match. Had it been Germany, England, etc. these damage control posts would be nonexistent.

[@timourmammadov35]

Damage control??? It was literally offside, correctly called.

[@PaulSpacey]

Indeed the call was correct. It may have appeared ‘suspect’ after 2 minutes of the opening game against the host nation but the decision was the correct one based on the LOTG.

[@Chundi23]

3 things; 1-VAR it’s still subjective 2- why didn’t the ref on the sideline call it as such, and 3- why did it take so long after the goal. Now aside from this “new” line technology, how is a player supposed to be conscious of this line while playing? An evident offsides is an offside; but come on, part of a leg, again how is the player supposed to know.

[@maksimus_channel]

I get it now, the second last opponent rule applied because the last opponent is the goalkeeper, so that one qatari player behind was replacing the goalkeeper's place at that moment am i right? cmiiw

[@PaulSpacey]

Exactly.

[@maksimus_channel]

@@PaulSpacey thank you for the explanation video , it really help me to understand and so glad I learn something new here

[@user-go8oj4dl4w]

If #2's header went backwards (away from goal) or vertically, would #11 have been onside?

[@PaulSpacey]

no, a player can be offside regardless of whether the ball goes forward or backwards.

[@one_mega_ohm9139]

Holy cow, somehow the right call is even dumber than it just being a bad call.

[@PaulSpacey]

😆

[@CornPopWazABadDude]

Lol. Hard to argue with this. Entire world cup will be remembered for discrimination by Qatar, no alcohol and bad offsides calls 😂😂😂. Looks like the bribes back fired.

[@android059]

Just read the line underneath... "Including the goalkeeper." The goalkeepers bottom is clearly closer to the goal than the defender they made the line on. They drew the line at the 3rd defender for some reason.

[@PaulSpacey]

It's the camera angle. The keepers butt is ahead of the attacker, it just looks further back because he is off the ground. VAR would not miss that.

[@samyloaiza98]

@@PaulSpacey VAR can be manipulated. This is a goal against the host nation in the first three minutes. Are we 6 and naive?

[@idiotquality8742]

Jeah but the no 13 player is in further position and the header player is passing BACK when the correct point of wiev is his leg.

[@nashmiddleton1763]

Did you see the image of the Argentina/Saudi Arabia offside VAR? Martínez’ feet are well behind the defender and the body is even except that his shoulder was leaning forward at a slight angle. Seems like nonsense technicality to me. Having one’s feet behind the defender seems like a well-timed run to me. He was penalized for the defender being flat-footed. This is football, not geometry.

[@PaulSpacey]

You’re right Nash. This is supposed to be football but it has been turned into geometry. The laws need to be updated, that is clear. The offside law as it stands is confusing and unacceptable for most fans, players and coaches.

[@joelnunez9554]

The problem here is the rules. I feel that the feet should be planted on the ground Infront of the defender, while the offensive player is getting the pass, for it to be called offside, perfect example, is the offside with Argentina vs Saudi Arabia, Martinezs and Messis feet was planted behind the player, but their upper body was leaning forward, and because of their upper body leaning forward is was called offside. like in American Football, just because a player is leaning outer bounds, if both of his feet are planted before the outside line, it should not be called out of bounds, or incomplete pass. It's a complete pass. This should not be offside. Rules are wrong, need to be changed. It's that simple.

[@pedrohuizar7750]

Okay so let me get this straight please someone answer the question. If number 11 was in the position he was in and received the ball instead of number two it wouldn’t have been offside correct?

[@PaulSpacey]

Correct. Nobody was offside from the original free kick.

[@Dan-iu5nr]

It's doesn't matter Ecuador clearly held back after the second half out of respect of not humiliating the country they played. This offside was technically closely reviewed to not humiliate Qatar. VAR just listened to what he was told to like a good little boy. I promise you all that you won't be hearing anything posative from British commentators. Even when they praise Ecuador, they throw in an underlining remark in between the lines to belittle Ecuador, lol 🇪🇨. Conclusion, cute, keep lying to the world. That worked in the 90s

[@PaulSpacey]

I’m not sure British commentators have any bias against Ecuador Dan; against some other European countries, possibly. But not Ecuador. Interesting hearing the perspective of fans of other countries though 👀😎

[@Dan-iu5nr]

@FC England your resonds reinforces my point. But I respect your opinion, thank you, and have a prosperous day 😊

[@rafaelgiusti]

What about the ball not going forward at all? it cannot be determined clearly, as well as golie touching the ball first, or even touching it after the bouncing, so many unclear impossible to determine, and not affecting the nature of the play...bad call, and bad use of VAR, or abuse of VAR...let's accept the mistakes with VAR to learn how to use it correctly

[@PaulSpacey]

The ball doesn’t have to go forward; you can be offside from a backward pass if you are ahead of the ball and meet the offside requirements. VAR seems to be inconsistent and the system is not perfect but in this case the decision was absolutely correct based on the circumstances.

[@mikebrandenburg9922]

Apparently there are new rules which clearly state that any all played you are offside, I have been looking into that claim but I can't find any rule in de Fifa rule book that doesn't say that the ball needs to be played forward. I find it interesting that we are now pushing nonsens that the ball doesn't have to be played forward to be offside. Every rulebook says the same the ball needs to be played forward. That we now ignore that rule is suspicious to say the least.

[@reluctantsocialist2670]

The ball doesn’t need to travel forward to be offside, it isn’t just the person receiving the ball who can be offside, you can be offside when the ball doesn’t go within 10 feet of you because you’re effecting play.

[@reluctantsocialist2670]

@@mikebrandenburg9922 Christ you’re dumb and lying, you haven’t been trying to find out from the rules because it’s always been in the rules, if I’m in an offside position and I score, even if you played the ball backwards and I have to run back to get it I’m offside. What I find hysterical is the fact you claim to have been hunting through the rules yet this is one of the most elementary things you’re taught as a kid in football. Shit, I was a goal keeper my entire youth and even I know this when it’s never applied to me ever. passing backwards can result in offside is if the receiver is in an offside position and his team mates pass cannons off a defender and onto the striker, the defender didn’t intentionally play the ball so it counts as a direct pass and it’s offside. Regardless of the pass, if you’re in an offside position and your team mate is the one playing the ball you’re offside

[@sergoborhomme3776]

Why make the game so complicated?

[@Gia1911Logous]

Bro no He's not offside You need to show it from the free kick, not the moment he makes contact with the ball Cmon this is basic

[@PaulSpacey]

It’s nothing to do with the original free kick; that’s completely immaterial. The offside issue only comes into play when #2 jumps and actually touches the ball. Then #11 is offside. Keep up bro. Come on, this is basic.

[@Saicos2]

@@PaulSpacey I see 11 onside because defenders: 16, 2 and goalkeeper are in front of him.

[@PaulSpacey]

Not in the still shot used by VAR which is a side angle shot. #11 has his leg ahead of both the keeper and the second to last defender which means he is offside when #2 jumps and touches the ball. Some of the angles can be deceptive but the decision in this case is definitely correct.

[@Gia1911Logous]

@@PaulSpacey I get it

[@shipthup2883]

Ridiculous microscopic offside thats funny and not fair.

[@dux8725]

The most controvertial thing here, is to compare equador leg's player who is offside with legs of the quatari defender and not with the butt of the goalkeeper, who is clearly the second last opponent in this situation. And this offside rule have to change at many level to make the game smoother and fun to look at, and not VAR shit. Cause in this situation quatar can defend there goal, and equador goal is nice to watch.

[@SPASPAWIZ]

Why didn’t the linesman put up his flag when it was offside? He called it after the goal was scored. There was no advantage to be played clearly!

[@STONJAUS_FILMS]

i came to understand the one right before the end of the first half against netherlands ... have to see it again but even tho there are players offside the one who scored is not offside....i don't know

[@twanvanderdonk2504]

An off-side player obstructed the view of the goalkeeper.

[@patoherrera2342]

If this is offside, then the referee laws need to change...

[@vinkata]

Gk's butt is covering the offside imo. 🤣

[@bosanpisan]

Fuck the offside decision. Thank God Ecuador still win. 😆😆

[@PaulSpacey]

😆

[@stephenmate7555]

Why Portugal n Ghana matches not using VAR camera Portugal twogoal was upsides

[@sreerajpaliyath1]

what about a qater player already in the post

[@yengkhompremochand5231]

Why don't show like this the match between por ve ghana

[@georgeofosu-ameyaw3349]

You can’t stat offside after coming back from on offside postion, otherwise you’d just be offside forever

[@TrickShotJak]

You missed the part of the law that states if the attacker is level with the second to last player it can’t be given as offside. Now it clearly shows that players knee was level with the keepers bum, so as the law states it should stand. It’s super coincidental that on the 3D model replay they didn’t involve the keeper only the attacker and defender. You can literally see when you pause the actual gameplay that the attacker was level with the keeper who is actually the second last player.

[@PaulSpacey]

The keeper only looks level because he is jumping off the ground. When you look at it closely, his butt appears ahead of the player, that’s why they used the other defender. Having said that, we can see that VAR is not 100% perfect.

[@TrickShotJak]

@@PaulSpacey I was going to say you can’t just say it really was or wasn’t without them legitimately showing the keepers position on the 3D model which I assume we’ll never see, at this point it’s a matter of opinion but to me that looks onside and it’s a little suspicious that they didn’t show it just to clear it but what do I know lol I’m not VAR 😅

[@sandeepthundikandy8671]

But Ecuador scored the second goal against Holland given off side was wrong and in that case they would had won that match vs Holland , if then they should be in second round but that didn’t happened coz of referee error . Germany scored a goal vs Spain first denied the same error and Brazil scored a another goal vs Switzerland but denied and that was on side and referee later called off side but that was wrong as well like that many goals were denied in this World Cup under controversial and now it’s past so cannot be corrected . Previous FIFA WC’s are all had many bad referee errors as well but cannot fix after all and sometimes the better side loose coz of referee errors . Technology developed but still human errors happening but that cannot control 😅

[@onlyonehoudini5302]

He was onside when they passed him the ball tho

[@adamdobrowolski2510]

Ok, I've given this one a lot of thought, because it is indeed the "correct" call, but... this is total rubbish (or garbage, for my folks here in the states). And the reason why is because both Qatar and Ecuador BOTH attempt play the ball after Estupinan's touch. If FIFA is going to roll out new stat technology that allocates %possession for "in -contest," it can eschew offsides for an "in-contest" type of play like this. I think we all know within the spirit of competition, this is different than a clear possessing pass being offside by a shin.

[@PaulSpacey]

most people would agree with you in this situation!

[@joso7748]

Bullshit! The keeper touches the ball, not #2. And after that, he tries to play the ball in the next move, before #2 touches the ball again. He participates in the game, it wasn't offside.

[@PaulSpacey]

Josue, it’s clear you are like most fans and have zero understanding of the offside law. Number #2 clearly touches the ball and it this point #11 is offside (that’s actually still true even if the keeper also touches it slightly). The fact the keeper tries to play the ball afterwards is completely immaterial; he doesn’t touch it afterwards, number #11 is the next player to touch it and he then becomes offside. It can be difficult explaining this to players and fans who don’t truly understand how the laws of the game work.

[@joso7748]

@@PaulSpacey I understand the rule, very well, so I don't your patronizing attitude. You claim the keeper doesn't touch the ball, when he clearly does, both times.... Whatever analysis you make after that is just based on a lie

[@PaulSpacey]

If the keeper touches the ball afterwards, it is impossible to see from any of the video angles. VAR determined he didn’t touch it, therefore offside is the correct decision. Your subjective view doesn’t make that change; whether or not you actually do understand the laws of the game.

[@redlimey]

@@PaulSpacey yep, as soon as the determination was made that the ball last touched #2's head, with the right angles available to us (going frame by frame from the real-time TV angle I would have contested #11's foot was nearer the goal line than 3 Qatar players), it's indisputable #11's foot is in an offside position.

[@sal0286]

He was behind the ball so he could not be offside

[@wilfredomejia7823]

They should take off offsides

[@shookieckookie]

So we need to change the rule to what actually makes sense, it should be the last defender not the second to last defender.

[@PaulSpacey]

The last defender includes the goalkeeper. So you are ok with a player being able to essentially stay right up the field next to the keeper and NOT be offside? That’s the reason its two defenders and not one 😉

[@edwin6791]

the actual rule states 2nd to last opponent. which makes sense. since there is a goalie. if you make it last defender there would be no offside ever. when is anyone ever behind the goalie?

[@PaulSpacey]

Exactly 👏

[@robinweber9640]

@@PaulSpacey that's a hideous take on the rule. So reward a wreckless keeper from running out of goal and whiffing on the ball? Now suddenly the guy defending you is irrelevant to onsides position? honestly the worst take in any sport.

[@atila7842]

broo the butt of the goalkeeper must be the line not the knee of the deffender look closely

[@PaulSpacey]

You can see clearly in the side angle still shot that the foot/lower leg of #11 is closer to the goal than the GK and the second to last defender. It’s the right call.

[@zany1983]

they stole goals…but we still win 😈

[@brotherdekaka]

doesn't make any sense, they took away that goal fo equdor

[@PaulSpacey]

Here is the other Ecuador goal disallowed vs Netherlands: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZWXna2ceJ51kJI

[@chullsie]

PURE BRIBERY

[@jahlim]

you haven't a clue on how to even start. you have to pause it at the moment the ball was kicked off from the corner and gauge if they're offside or not. not from the position where ball is already near their heads.

[@PaulSpacey]

You don’t have a clue unfortunately. It was a free kick by the way, not a corner. And that has zero impact on this situation; the offside is determined when #2 touches the ball and #11 is offside, not when the free kick is taken. A good example of someone who has no idea what they are talking about. Bless you.

[@PaulSpacey]

Here is Ecuador's disallowed goal vs Netherlands: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZWXna2ceJ51kJI

[@khaizma]

are you sure the GK didn't get his fist to it first - and would that have made them onside?

[@PaulSpacey]

It doesn’t look as though the keeper touches it at all but even if we accept that he touches it slightly, #2 touches it last which still makes #11 correctly offside.

[@jacch90]

Totalmente deacuerdo y explicado

[@PaulSpacey]

Gracias!

[@edwin6791]

@@PaulSpacey to me it looks like the goalie touches the ball on the way down from the header before it bounces and is headed

[@sanjeewawijesiri555]

football var is not100%OK.... cricket var disishon is the best 100%ok......referees are learn more & honest....

[@R10TRUTH]

Clearly onside, all of a sudden everyone has forgotten how offsides begin. It begins when the person begins the pass, not when the receiving player touches it. The free kick started, the first person to head was onside. The second touch then comes from the Ecuadoran player as a header where he was onside when the first touch was made behind several Qatar players. Qatar paid to get this goal removed to avoid embarrassment and people like you are posting disinformation to hide their corruption

[@PaulSpacey]

Watch the goal again and reconsider your thoughts on offside (which are incorrect). In this situation, the free kick is nothing to do with the offside decision; offside only comes into play when #2 headers the ball and #11 is in an offside position.

[@veselinbabic8617]

I said its clear offside

[@PaulSpacey]

👍

[@medhatyounan1303]

$$$$$$$ hhhhhhh

[@lpaiello]

It might be correct but still the defender was never the second-last opponent but the goalkeeper was therefore the line should be with the goalkeeper butt no with the defender's leg.

[@PaulSpacey]

GK butt is ahead of the player, it just looks different because of the angle and the fact he is jumping off the ground.