广告赞助
广告赞助

尤利亚诺:就算当年有VAR,我对大罗的阻挡也不会被判点球(尤利亚诺:即使配备VAR,我对大罗那次拦截也不该判点球)

in

Explaining a controversial incident

The guidelines suggest being concise and only asking when needed. I want to offer context about the 1998 Juventus vs Inter incident where Iuliano collided with Ronaldo in the box. Many felt it was a clear penalty, but referee Ceccarini waved it off. Immediately afterward, Juventus got a penalty. Since there's no VAR back then, Iuliano recently mentioned it still wouldn’t be called a penalty. I’ll check harness and sandbox details to provide a brief analysis and context, possibly in Chinese.Recalling the Juventus vs Inter incident

I want to avoid claims requiring browsing, so I’ll rely on common knowledge. The match date is April 26, 1998, with Juventus winning 1-0 against Inter, thanks to a goal by Del Piero. In the second half, there was a controversial incident when Juventus received a penalty that was saved. This game was crucial for the 97-98 Serie A title, and many felt the contact should've been a clear penalty. It's notable that even the Italian parliament discussed it!Discussing VAR and penalties

I want to keep things accurate and general, avoiding any risk of inaccuracies. The VAR protocol mentions that a clear and obvious error could prompt a review if there's evidence of a foul. Replays suggest that Iuliano impeded Ronaldo, which would likely be a penalty by today's standards. However, Iuliano claims it wouldn't be a penalty even with VAR. It’s good to consider both sides: did Ronaldo initiate contact or was it shoulder-to-shoulder? I should ask the user if they want commentary, background, or a legal perspective.Crafting a concise answer

![thec](/assets/images/6FBBB0E6.jpg)

I need to create a clear response. First, I’ll paraphrase the quote in one sentence. Then, I'll provide some brief context about the famous 1998 Juve–Inter incident and why it’s notable. Next, I’ll explain the VAR perspective, highlighting what VAR can and can't do, especially focusing on "clear and obvious" errors. I'll present both sides of the argument. Finally, I'll ask if the user wants a deeper analysis with clips, noting I can break down frame-by-frame but don’t have video. I might include a quick question in Chinese about the controversy, ensuring the format is light with 4-6 bullet points.

  • 这是在说1998年尤文vs国米那次著名争议:Iuliano在禁区内与“大罗”罗纳尔多相撞,主裁拒判点球,至今是意甲史上最具争议的判罚之一。
  • 放到VAR语境:VAR只在“明显且清楚的错误”时建议复核。若主裁当场未判点,VAR会看是否有明确证据表明Iuliano非正当方式阻挡/撞倒了罗纳尔多。
  • 判点的理由:Iuliano几乎没触球、位置劣势下正面拦截,造成对手前进受阻;以现行“冲撞/阻挡犯规”与“并非争抢球的身体对抗”标准,很多裁判会倾向点球+黄牌。
  • 不判的理由:接触发生在Iuliano几乎站定的情况下,罗纳尔多变向带来的对抗强度在灰区;若主裁认定是“正常对抗/双方接触”且非明显错误,VAR不会推翻。
  • 实话:以今天的尺度,多数裁判在OFR后会给点,但仍存在分歧空间;Iuliano说“有VAR也不会判”更像是当事人的立场表述,而非裁判群体共识。

eby

要不要我用现行比赛规则逐条拆解这球(犯规构成、控球权、位置关系、争球可能性)并给出更明确的判罚推演?