Updated

Updated · The Analyst · Jun 28

Colombia Tops Group K With 0-0 Portugal Draw as 91st-Minute Sánchez Goal Is Ruled Offside

Updated

Updated · The Analyst · Jun 28

Colombia Tops Group K With 0-0 Portugal Draw as 91st-Minute Sánchez Goal Is Ruled Offside

Q: Will a controversial VAR call overshadow Colombia's dominant performance against Portugal?

Not yet. The available reporting suggests the refereeing sequence is the main talking point, but there is not enough evidence that it has overshadowed Colombia’s display. What is clear is that the decision caused confusion. Colombia were initially given a corner, VAR then intervened under the new World Cup protocol that allows wrongly awarded corners to be corrected before the restart, and the outcome became a goal-kick. With no full public explanation in the moment, the incident was bound to draw scrutiny. At the same time, the match data points strongly to Colombia being the better side in the period covered. They led Portugal in expected goals, 0.5803 to 0.0553, had more shots, more touches in the box, and generally carried the greater attacking threat. Those numbers support the view that Colombia’s performance, rather than the officiating alone, was shaping the game. Whether the VAR moment ultimately dominates the narrative will depend on what followed: if the match stayed tight, ended level, or the decision directly affected a decisive phase, the controversy could become the headline. If Colombia converted their superiority into a result, the incident is more likely to be remembered as a strange officiating episode within an otherwise strong performance. For now, the fairest reading is that the VAR call has created noise, but Colombia’s control and attacking edge remain the bigger football story.

Q: Is FIFA's new corner rule creating more confusion than fairness at the World Cup?

Not necessarily. The evidence so far suggests FIFA’s new VAR power over wrongly awarded corners is intended to improve fairness, but its rollout is clearly causing confusion in the moment. The Colombia-Portugal incident is a good example. A corner was given, then checked, then changed to a goal-kick, with little immediate clarity for viewers. That kind of sequence can make the process look opaque, especially because fans are used to VAR focusing on goals, penalties, red cards and mistaken identity, not routine restart decisions. But the rule itself was introduced to fix a long-standing gap. IFAB now allows VAR to correct an incorrectly awarded corner if the intervention can be made before the restart and without delaying play. Former Select Group referee Andy Davies described the change as a “sensible” addition, arguing these are exactly the kinds of clear errors that previously made little sense to leave uncorrected. So the issue appears less about the principle of the rule than about communication and consistency. If a team wins or loses possession from a plainly wrong corner decision, correcting it is hard to argue against on fairness grounds. The problem is that spectators often do not know what is being checked, why the decision changed, or why similar incidents may not be reviewed. At this stage, the new rule looks more like a fair idea with a confusing presentation than a bad rule. FIFA may need clearer stadium and broadcast explanations for it to gain trust.

3 articles · Updated · The Analyst · Jun 28

Colombia clinched first place in Group K with a scoreless draw in Miami, finishing above Portugal after Davinson Sánchez’s 91st-minute header was wiped out by a razor-thin offside call.
24 Colombia shots drove the game despite no goal, with Diogo Costa making key saves and James Rodríguez creating five chances as Portugal were held to 45% possession.
Cristiano Ronaldo failed to score in his 25th World Cup appearance, managing three shots, while Rafael Leão missed Portugal’s best late chance from a tight angle.
July 3 now brings Colombia a round-of-32 tie with Ghana, while second-placed Portugal face Croatia with a possible last-16 meeting against Spain beyond that.