Was Refereeing in the 2018 World Cup Final Biased Against Croatia?

The 2018 FIFA World Cup Final between France and Croatia remains a controversial topic of discussion, with some arguing that the refereeing decisions were biased against the latter. One of the most heated debates centers around a key penalty call that went in favor of France, which many believe could have altered the course of the match.

Key Controversies of the 2018 World Cup Final

In the 2018 FIFA World Cup Final, the referee's decision to award a penalty to France just before the Croatian defense conceded a goal became a debated topic. Many question whether the referee's approach was influenced by the French team's protests and a video assistant referee (VAR) review. According to the facts available from the instant replay, the referee had no choice but to follow through with the penal decision.

Lukasz Piszczek's performance under pressure was also a point of contention. Lloris' defensive efforts and his apparent gift goal played a significant role in Croatia's overall performance. The match required calm and composure, qualities in short supply for the Croatian team. Emotional and technical lapses at crucial moments undermined Croatia’s performance.

Technical and Emotional Finesse in High-Pressure Scenarios

The 2018 World Cup Final demanded high-level technical and emotional precision. Although Croatia had its shining moments, the team made several errors that contributed to their eventual defeat. The distractions, such as the gold shoes worn by some players, diverted attention from the critical aspects of the match.

Penalty Decision of Ivan Perisic

The decisive moment in Croatia's downfall was arguably the penalty that Griezmann scored. A crucial turning point, this penalty was called after Ivan Perisic's actions during the run-up to the shot. The key point in question is whether Perisic's hand contact with the ball justified a penalty.

Perisic's action, which appeared to deflect the ball towards his leg, made it a legitimate penalty according to the rules. However, the irony lies in Perisic's subsequent appearance at fault. During the final, even minor errors could be magnified due to the high pressure and attention. The fact that Perisic unintentionally allowed the ball to touch his hand, leading to a penalty, is a point of contention. Critics argue that this was a clear sign of bias and unfair judgment.

Similarity to Previous Incidents

Comparisons to previous incidents, such as the one involving Marcos Rojo in the Nigeria–Argentina match, highlight the complexity of such calls. In Rojo's case, the ball deflected off his head and then hit his arm. The similar nature of Perisic's and Rojo's actions raises questions about consistency in penalty calls.

The irony is that while Perisic's action was legal and fair, the emphasis on this moment and the subsequent penalties against Croatia raise suspicions. Whether the decision was biased or not, the law-abiding nature of the penalty call remains the focus of the discussion.

In conclusion, the 2018 World Cup Final controversy around refereeing and penalties remains a compelling topic. Whether perceived bias or just the application of the rules, the outcome of the match was significantly influenced by these calls. The incident with Perisic is a prime example of how such decisions can shape the course of a critical match.