Controversy in Uruguay-Peru over the center of Trauco that the visiting squad claimed entered the arc: the device that could have solved the enigma

The action took place in the first minute of addition and if the goal was validated, it would have radically changed the positions of the Playoffs

Guardar

One of the great controversies of all the South American Qualifiers occurred in the match between Uruguay and Peru, key to qualifying for the Qatar 2022 World Cup. In fact, thanks to the triumph by the minimum after Giorgian De Arrascaeta's goal, Celeste got a ticket to the World Cup, while the Inca team will have to wait until the last date to aspire to a playoff.

For this reason, this latest action that took place at the Centenario stadium in Montevideo is of great importance. Did the ball enter after the cross sent by Miguel Trauco that goalkeeper Sergio Rochet captured over the goal line? The play was in the first minute of addition and would have meant a draw, so the Eliminantorias table would change radically.

At this point something very important needs to be clarified. In the absence of the DAG, which is the Automatic Goal Detector technology (the famous chip that is embedded in the ball), there is only the appreciation of the camera and the simple impression of the view. In this regard, if judged by the video of the broadcast, everything indicates that the ball entered in its entirety. However, when the photos are viewed from another angle, doubts are triggered.

I repeat, for me it was totally entered and it was a goal, but only within my visual subjectivity. To be fair, that camera in the transmission is not perpendicular to the curve of the ball, so I can only say within my visual subjectivity that it doesn't seem to fit completely.

Of course, only with the DAG would one have the accuracy. Through this technology one allows you to see two things: a zenithal figure, that is, from above, and also the referee would ring the clock confirming the goal. The reality is that applying this technology requires extra cameras placed behind the arches and they are considered very expensive economically. That's why they prefer to take risks with the human eye and there was no DAGs.

Article in development...

Guardar