The Croatian Football Federation (HNS) has lodged a formal complaint with FIFA following their round of 32 exit from the 2026 FIFA World Cup, claiming that an over-reliance on ball sensor technology violated the spirit of the game. The complaint centers on a disallowed goal in stoppage time that would have leveled the score against Portugal, who won 2-1.
Disallowed goal and the 'heartbeat graphic'
In the dying moments of the match, defender Josko Gvardiol appeared to score an equalizer for Croatia. The goal was initially awarded, but after a lengthy VAR review led by referee Espen Eskas, the decision was overturned. The reversal was based on data from the Trionda match ball, which contains IMU sensors capable of detecting the slightest contact. FIFA stated that the sensors detected a microscopic touch from Igor Matanovic's hair during the buildup, which changed the offside calculation. This data was displayed to viewers as a 'heartbeat graphic.'
FIFA defended the process in a statement quoted by Goal.com: 'IMU sensors housed within the Trionda ball are capable of determining any slight contact, displayed to viewers in the broadcast as a heartbeat graphic, and allowing officials an unprecedented level of data to make fast, accurate decisions.'
Croatia's argument: 'clear and obvious' threshold violated
Croatia's HNS argues that this level of granularity moves beyond the 'clear and obvious error' mandate of VAR. They contend that the technology relies on data that players cannot perceive in real time, undermining the flow of the match. The federation also criticized a penalty awarded to Portugal in the 68th minute, converted by Cristiano Ronaldo, which leveled the score before Portugal's winner.
HNS spokesperson Tomislav Pacak told RTL Danas, as quoted by Goal.com: 'The Croatian Football Association sent a letter to FIFA President Gianni Infantino in which we expressed deep disappointment and disagreement... because of the process itself that led to those decisions. To begin with, we believe that the VAR protocol was completely incorrectly applied to the penalty kick for Portugal... And more importantly, with Guardiola's [sic] equalizer, Pasalic was awarded offside against the rules and spirit of football due to Matanovic's non-existent ball play, because the sensor showed so.'
Formal letter requests detailed explanation
The complaint focuses on whether VAR protocols exceeded their intended mandate. HNS argues that the 'clear and obvious error' threshold was not met for either decision. Pacak added: 'We believe that this is an abuse of technology, which we welcome in football, but we believe that this application is not beneficial to FIFA, teams and football fans... we believe that it is important to warn FIFA and request a detailed explanation of all decisions.'
FIFA has not yet publicly responded to the complaint but previously defended the technology's accuracy. The incident has sparked broader debate about the role of sensor data in officiating and its impact on the game's traditional flow.
