​England edged a hard-fought 2-1 victory over Norway in extra time, though the outcome probably should not have reached that stage. Jude Bellingham was superb and produced a brace, but his second-half goal at 45’+2’ arguably should not have stood because the ball struck a cable for the overhead camera in the moments before the strike. Under FIFA rules, play should have been blown dead.
As it happened, it was not blown dead. Bellingham eventually found the net, and a chorus of discontent would follow in the days ahead. As journalist Joe Brennan explained, the sequence began when a Norway free-kick led to a ball controlled by an England player that then rebounded off the overhead camera wire that suspends the Spidercam above the pitch. The incident, if treated strictly by the rules, would have triggered an automatic restart from the referee.
Former Premier League referee Mark Clattenburg, who now serves as an analyst for FOX Sports, indicated that this contact with the camera cable constitutes a reviewable incident. He noted that an attacking phase of play leading to a goal falls within the VAR’s remit, and that the VAR should have intervened. Despite the protests from the Norway players, the goal remained on the scoreboard.
Later, FIFA issued a statement attempting to justify the stance, effectively attributing the decision to the sensor inside the ball: FIFA said they had checked the data but found no peak on the ball’s heartbeat sensor graph, so the VAR was not summoned. The question remains: what is the point of VAR if it cannot intervene in incidents like this? FIFA will have to answer that, independent of any blame placed on the ball sensor.
To readers, the episode raises broader questions about the effectiveness and reach of VAR in similar atypical situations, and whether the current protocols adequately cover interference by equipment beyond the ball itself.