​Harry Kane felt aggrieved when the referee waved away England’s appeals for a foul on the captain in the moments leading up to Norway’s surprising opener in their World Cup quarter-final. England had largely dominated possession in the first half, but they fell behind in the 36th minute as Andreas Schjelderup struck from close range after hitting the post from out wide. The goal appeared to be intended as a cross, but it deflected in, changing the balance of the match.
In the build-up to the strike, Kane clashed with Norway midfielder Patrick Berg, who appeared to come through the back of the England captain and leave Kane clutching his ankle. The ball surged toward England’s box, and Norway found the net, prompting Kane to push his appeals to referee Clement Turpin in the hope that the effort would be disallowed. Yet there was no obvious VAR intervention, and Turpin signalled for play to resume, allowing Norway’s goal to stand.
The incident evoked memories of controversial VAR calls in other major matches. In a different scenario, Argentina benefited from a VAR decision that ruled in their favour for a foul further back in the buildup to Egypt’s second goal in a previous knockout encounter—an outcome that helped the holders advance 3-2. England, understandably, might have hoped for a similar reversal.
However, ITV’s refereeing expert Christina Unkel disagreed with those concerns, stating that the correct decision had been made. “We can see clearly that the Norway player was able to tip the ball, with no contact to Kane’s ankle, so there’s no foul, unlike in the Argentina vs. Egypt case—a clear change of possession without a foul,” she argued. Former England defender Gary Neville echoed that sentiment, insisting, “It’s not a free-kick, absolutely not.”
England did not dwell on the setback. They equalised through Jude Bellingham shortly before the break, and Kane twice appeared to have a moment of contention in the final minutes of the first half. He thought he had earned a second flare of opportunities when he seemed to notch another goal, only for the linesman to raise the flag for offside. The decision was later confirmed as correct.
Despite the setback, England pressed on and continued to push for a lead in the second half. The match remained tightly contested as both sides sought to assert control, with Kane’s influence remaining a focal point for England’s attack as the encounter progressed.
In summarising the episode, Kane’s frustration at the decision not to overturn the opener was acknowledged by pundits who believed the sequence warranted closer scrutiny, while others defended Turpin’s call based on what could be clearly observed on the field. As the tie unfolded, England’s response emphasized resilience and a continued commitment to pressing for a decisive result, underscoring the fine lines that can define a World Cup quarter-final clash.