The Croatian Football Federation has written to FIFA requesting clarification on VAR and referee decisions, and increased transparency.

On July 15th, Beijing time, the Croatian media outlet "Shammar" reprinted a letter from the Croatian Football Federation to FIFA. In the letter, the Croatian Football Federation requested clarification on VAR and referee decisions, and increased transparency following the chaotic final stages of Portugal's match.

Contents of the letter from the Croatian Football Federation to FIFA

This World Cup has once again demonstrated the global strength and popularity of football. Therefore, we should adhere to the fundamental values of football – fairness, fair competition, and the equal application of the rules of football to all national teams.

Because of the strong reactions from referees, media representatives, football experts and the public around the world to some controversial situations, we felt it necessary to contact you to clarify the application of the Laws of the Game and FIFA protocols when the referee made his decision in the World Cup Round of 16 match between Croatia and Portugal in Toronto on July 2, 2026.

In the second half of that match, Croatia had three goals disallowed, all due to delayed offside decisions. Furthermore, Portugal was awarded a penalty after VAR intervention, which they ultimately used to equalize. Although the referee was near the player and witnessed the foul, he did not deem it sufficient to award a penalty. Therefore, this situation does not constitute a "serious missed call." Given that such fouls occur almost every match in the penalty area, we similarly believe the referee cannot reasonably consider it an "obvious and obvious error." In other words, neither of the two basic criteria for VAR intervention was met; according to VAR rules, VAR has neither the right nor the obligation to require the referee to review the video footage.

The most controversial moment came when referee Espen Eskas disallowed Gevadiol's goal in the 103rd minute, arguing that Mario Pasalic was offside. FIFA's official statement said: "The ball's built-in interconnected ball technology detected Igor Matanovic touching the ball, which allowed the referee to correctly rule offside and disallow Gevadiol's goal."

Meanwhile, FIFA's official explanation of the offside rule states: "Hair is considered part of the body only when it affects the movement or trajectory of the ball. This may only occur when there is significant contact with a large amount of hair, such as a bun on the top of the head."

Therefore, it is unclear whether the referee disallowed the Croatian goal simply because Matanovic may have touched the ball with a hair, or because he believed that such contact affected the ball's movement or trajectory—a conclusion that cannot be drawn from the publicly available video.

Furthermore, all available video footage clearly shows that after the ball passed over Matanovic's head, its direction, trajectory, speed, and spin remained unchanged. In other words, he did not touch the ball, therefore there was no offside issue. We believe that it is fundamentally flawed to determine the outcome of such an important match based solely on a barely perceptible vibration recorded by sensors.

We believe that neither football, fans, players, referees, the spirit of the game, nor FIFA itself will benefit from an over-reliance on technology, let alone what the human eye sees. As the reactions around the world (not just Croatian fans) demonstrate, almost no one believed Matanovic had touched the ball. When technology attempts to convince the public that this wasn't the case, it's understandable that many called the decision "blatant robbery" or claimed "technology is destroying football." This widespread negative reaction does nothing to enhance FIFA's reputation or strengthen public trust in technological innovation. This is particularly worrying because we firmly believe that technology plays an important and desirable role in football—but certainly not in this way.

The situation becomes more complicated by the following questions: If the sensor data unequivocally confirms touch, and the VAR team indisputably rules offside, why was the referee initially called to review the replay on the sidelines? In this case, it was entirely a factual judgment that VAR had the right to make independently. Conversely, if the referee was indeed called to review the replay, what exactly did he review? What specific footage led him to the conclusion that Matanovic touched the ball or influenced its trajectory?

Furthermore, the existing television replay clearly shows—through the data displayed at the bottom of the screen—that the alleged "peak" of contact occurred long before the ball reached the Croatian striker accused of touching it. Such replay is clearly insufficient as reliable evidence for making such a crucial decision. Therefore, we request FIFA to provide the Croatian Football Federation with the relevant video assistant referee (VAR) footage so that we can determine why this "peak" occurred before the ball approached Igor Matanovic.

We fully recognize that no further explanation of these events can change the outcome of the match against Portugal. We respect the Portuguese team and congratulate them on advancing to the round of 16.

However, given the passionate attention football matches—especially the World Cup—enjoy from billions of fans worldwide, we believe it is necessary to further strengthen trust in referees, particularly in the standards and methods of applying modern technology, to prevent its abuse or misuse. Everything that happened in this match, especially the final offside decision, has caused immense dissatisfaction among fans worldwide, negatively impacting this historic World Cup.

Therefore, we believe FIFA should conduct a comprehensive analysis of all the controversial moments in this match and provide a full explanation for the refereeing decisions that decisively influenced the outcome of the World Cup qualifiers. While such an explanation cannot salvage Croatia's chance to challenge for another major international title during Luka Modric's extraordinary national team career, we sincerely hope that clearer rules and more robust procedures will prevent similar unfair and unethical decisions—namely, decisions where sensors override human vision—from recurring in the future.

Unfortunately, this decision has left fans incredibly disappointed—from the Croatian fans in the stadium to fans, media representatives, commentators, and the general public around the world. We firmly believe that such situations are avoidable, which is why we decided to communicate with everyone in this way. We also know that no explanation can alleviate the tears, sadness, and disappointment of the players and fans.

In light of all the above, we urge you to carefully consider the questions and suggestions we have raised.

We will wait and see FIFA's response, but what is more important for us is how Croatia will be judged in the future.

(End of letter)

Nearly two weeks have passed since Croatia's World Cup Round of 16 match against Portugal. According to the newspaper *Morning Post*, the Croatian Football Federation (HNS) immediately sent a strongly worded letter to FIFA the day after the match, demanding an explanation for the result witnessed by the world and insisting on respect for fair play principles and the rules of the game. FIFA has not responded. However, the Croatian Football Federation insists on a reasonable explanation from FIFA and will not give up until it receives a satisfactory response. Croatia has previously expressed dissatisfaction with refereeing decisions in major tournaments on numerous occasions. Some decisions were subjective, while others unfortunately reflected objective facts. The Croatian Football Federation is making every effort to prevent such incidents from happening again, so as to avoid further anger towards Infantino and his team.