Was VAR right to disallow the goal against Portugal? Pedro Henriques' analysis

14’ Entering the Uzbekistan box, Odildzhon Khamrobekov, with his left arm, grabbed and pulled Pedro Neto's left arm as Neto was dangerously advancing through the center, effectively cutting short a promising attack. A well-awarded direct free-kick and a deserved yellow card.

20’ Unsporting conduct. Near his own penalty area, Karimov, with no intention of playing the ball, deliberately extended his left arm and struck Nuno Mendes in the neck area. Given the infraction, its location, and the player's attitude, a yellow card should have been shown.

23’ Tactical foul. João Cancelo, with the sole purpose of stopping and disrupting Uzbekistan's counter-attack, charged into and brought down Eldor Shomurodov as he was breaking away at speed. A yellow card should have been issued to the Portuguese full-back.

29' Attacking foul. The VAR's intervention was correct on a clear and obvious attacking foul. On this occasion, Abbosbek Fayzullaev stretched out his right leg, missed the ball, and kicked João Cancelo's right shin, thus winning the ball illegally. The goal was rightly disallowed.

38’ Legal play. On the National Team's third goal, there was no offside infraction. At the moment Bruno Fernandes passed to Cristiano Ronaldo, Ronaldo was onside, played in by both Abdukodir Khusanov and Rustamjon Ashurmatov.

45’ The referee added six minutes of extra time, compensating for time lost due to the following incidents: a medical hydration break, three goals and their celebrations, a disallowed goal for Uzbekistan after a VAR review, and the yellow card that was shown.

58’ From a quickly taken free-kick by Bruno Fernandes, Cristiano Ronaldo was onside. Then, in a one-on-one situation with the Uzbek goalkeeper, Abduvakhid Nematov, the National Team captain struck the ball with his right foot and, in the follow-through, collided with the goalkeeper. The keeper had merely spread himself to make the save, not tripping or kicking Cristiano Ronaldo. The referee's decision to wave play on was correct and confirmed by VAR, as there was no reason for a penalty kick.

68’ A yellow card was correctly shown to Renato Veiga for a late challenge without the ball. He extended his right arm and struck Azizjon Ganiev squarely in the chest. A caution and a direct free-kick were awarded. Good decision.

69’ Hydration break. Law 7 (The Duration of the Match), page 87, point 3, 'Allowance for Time Lost,' states that medical stoppages, for example, for hydration (which should not exceed one minute) and cooling breaks (from 90 seconds to three minutes) are permitted by the regulations. In the World Cup, these are mandatory midway through each half (23rd and 68th minute), but only when the ball is out of play or the game is stopped. In this specific match, the first-half break lasted 3 minutes and 25 seconds, and the second-half break was 3 minutes and 10 seconds. For commercial and marketing reasons, FIFA has branded this stoppage as a 'Hydration Break.'

87’ Onside. For the fifth goal, scored by Rafael Leão, during the build-up down the right flank, at the moment Trincão passed to Nélson Semedo, Semedo had more than two opponents between him and the goal line, meaning there was no infraction.

90’ The referee added five minutes of extra time, which was insufficient given the incidents of the second half. Besides the yellow card shown and the goals, there were four substitution stoppages involving four players, and we also had the hydration break which lasted 3 minutes and 10 seconds.