Did I just see Donald Trump call someone racist mudd ?

arteta watching this tuchel haramball

Jamie O'Hara calls for Thomas Tuchel's immediate sacking after England's painful World Cup exit!

😡 “Sack him!” 🤬 “Sack him now!” O’Hara demands Thomas Tuchel loses his job after England’s loss to Argentina! 🔥

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🤦

He was hired to make brave adventurous decisions to win games like Klopp would have. In the end he did the same that southgate would have. Guardiola or Klopp would never have done what he did and that's why they are greats and tuchel is roberto di matteo category (fluked a CL with someone elses team)

Tuchel is to blame for England choking. Up 1-0 you decide to park the bus for 30 minutes. You concede free header after free header and still stick to playing in your own end allowing argentina to dictate the game. You have the better midfield - control the game w possession.

On England's first goal of the match, the ball seemed to hit the cable of a camera. FIFA Media released a statement that the ball sensor did not peak in the sequence. #FIFAWorldCup

Yeah, you want me to believe it could sense a hair?

I can’t stop laughing at this ai slop lol 😂

Egypt get a goal taken back for a foul in their end, the almost exact foul gets committed on Salah in the box and not even a check? 🤷🏻‍♂️

🚨JUST IN: The Croatian football federation has filed an official complaint to FIFA requesting a detailed explanation for the disallowed goal They’re claiming an 'abuse' of technology

“Yeah I’m a life long Messi fan, i definitely want to see him win another World Cup” Me when Vozinha makes the save of his life to deny Messi a goal:

Looking at your bro remembering that the Ghanaian witch doctor predicted Argentina to lose

Has anyone seen a reasonable explanation for why this rule wasn’t applied or referenced? The ball may have grazed his hair, but there was no change to the movement, spin, or trajectory of the ball.

Portugal vs Croatia The decision to disallow Joško Gvardiol’s late equalizer for Croatia against Portugal relies on a fundamentally flawed and contradictory interpretation of the rules of football. The official ruling states that a microscopic sensor spike inside the ball registered a touch from Igor Matanović, constituting a "pass" that put Mario Pašalić offside. This logic falls apart under intense scrutiny when evaluating intent, physics, and the game's established precedents. 1. Completely Clean Initial Onside Positioning First and foremost, when Ivan Perišić initiated the original ball into the box, every single Croatian player was in a completely legal, onside position. The entire sequence built toward a legitimate scoring play. Stripping away a critical goal based on a microscopic, invisible inflection point later in the sequence violates the spirit of fair play. 2. Contradictory Logic Regarding Intent The VAR interpretation relies on a paradox. The officials claim that the touch from Portugal defender Renato Veiga was "irrelevant" and a mere deflection because he was not the intended recipient and was oblivious to the ball hitting his back. Yet, they simultaneously label Igor Matanović's headbutt attempt as a "pass" to Mario Pašalić. Matanović was clearly making a direct attempt on goal, not trying to pass. If the referee rules that a player's deliberate intent does not matter for Matanović, they cannot logically turn around and use a lack of intent to excuse Veiga. 3. The Precedent of Defender Liability and the "Block" Ruling that Renato Veiga's touch was irrelevant directly contradicts basic football rules regarding defensive liability. Consider an identical physical scenario on the pitch: an attacker fires a shot or cross full force at a defender who has his back turned and has no idea the ball is coming. If that ball hits the oblivious defender's back and goes out of bounds over the goal line, the attacking team is awarded a corner kick. The defender is held fully liable for the touch simply by taking up space on the field. Veiga did not stand in the 18-yard box by happenstance; he placed himself there deliberately to block the path to the net and take up critical space. If the microchip dictates that Matanović's goal attempt counts as a conscious play on the ball, then Veiga's body placement must be counted as a defensive block. 4. A Loose Ball Interception, Not a Pass Because Matanović's action was a clear attempt to score, the resulting collision with Veiga’s back was a physical block that completely disrupted the ball's original speed and trajectory. Once the ball deflected off a defender who was actively acting as a human shield, the phase of play changed. Mario Pašalić did not receive a calculated, deliberate pass from his teammate; he intercepted a loose ball resulting directly from a defender’s physical block. Therefore, no offside offense occurred, and Joško Gvardiol’s goal should have stood. #croatia #portugal @FOXSports @barstoolsports #fifa #portugalvscroatia @FIFAWorldCup

FIFA's chip in the ball and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

🇭🇷 Croatia got eliminated from the World Cup by a closed-source sensor. FIFA says the Kinexon chip in the Trionda "proved" Matanović touched the ball. Absolute disgrace. What actually happened: they ran signal processing over 500Hz IMU data from a 14-gram sensor and isolated a supposed contact spike from thousands of noisy samples dominated by bladder harmonics, panel flex, spin wobble and stadium micro-tremors, then nullified one of the most dramatic World Cup equalizers in history via spectral analysis of what is essentially glorified noise. Oh, and it gets better. They moved the chip this year. Back in 2022, it used to hang suspended in the center of the ball. Now it's glued into the sidewall of ONE panel, with counterweights stuffed into the other three so the ball doesn't fly like a shopping cart. So sensitivity now depends on which side of the ball the "contact" happens relative to the sensor. Totally fine basis for ending a nation's tournament. An IMU measures acceleration. Somewhere in a proprietary pipeline, a threshold decides which acceleration counts as "touch." That threshold is unpublished. The false positive rate is unpublished. The calibration data is unpublished. The patents are literally still in their secrecy window. And FIFA owns the raw data, so nobody can independently audit the trace that ended Modrić's last World Cup. And we're all supposed to accept a "heartbeat graphic" on the broadcast as if that settles anything. Since we sadly all know you won't ever admit your crimes or remove this technology for good, at least open source the detection pipeline, @FIFAcom! Publish the thresholds, the error rates, the raw IMU trace from last night. If the tech is right, transparency costs nothing, right?

🚨🗣️ Joe Cole: “I think it’s one of the worst decisions at a World Cup ever.” 🗣️Gary Lineker: “They came out with a hair-strand touch.” 🗣️Micah Richards: “It’s ridiculous to rule that offside.” Croatia were robbed in broad daylight 😭