Kinexon Connected Ball LaLiga Doubt After Refereeing Expert Warning on VAR
The Kinexon connected ball LaLiga doubt is a new development after the review of the penalty decision in the Basque derby between Athletic Club and Real Sociedad, which Athletic Club won 2-1. The earlier review found that the penalty decision may not have been correct, and the new reporting has raised a wider question about the technology used to support offside decisions in LaLiga. The Technical Committee of Referees requested an urgent report from Kinexon, the company behind the chip inside the match ball, and the reported findings from Kinexon, together with reported expert criticism, have placed doubt over the reliability of marginal offside decisions. The reporting does not establish that results were manipulated, and the penalty decision was not overturned, but the questions raised are serious for the credibility of the system.
Kinexon admitted a slight difference in synchronisation of one or two frames between the ball signal and the VAR video, equivalent to 20 to 40 milliseconds, according to the reporting. The admission came after the Technical Committee of Referees requested an urgent report from the company, and the reported difference is small in time but potentially important in football, where a pass and an offside position can be decided by a fraction of a second. The connected ball uses a chip to send a signal at the exact moment when the ball is kicked, and that signal is combined with video and with limb tracking cameras to decide the position of a player at the moment of the pass. If the ball signal and the video are not synchronised with complete precision, the frame chosen for the offside decision could be one or two frames away from the true moment of the pass.
Former international referee Iturralde Gonzalez warned on the El Larguero programme on Cadena SER that doubt had been planted over everything, according to the reporting. He said that he was not claiming that the difference was created on purpose, but that the admission had planted doubt over the system as a whole. He questioned whether marginal offside decisions up to Matchday 11 were legitimate, given the reported margin of one or two frames in the synchronisation of the ball signal and the video. His warning was presented as expert criticism, not as a proven finding that any specific result was wrong, and the distinction matters for a fair reading of the reporting.
Iturralde Gonzalez also criticised Javier Tebas, the president of LaLiga, for the comments made about VAR intervention in two incidents, according to the reporting. Tebas said that VAR should have intervened in an incident involving Kylian Mbappe, while a stamping incident involving Diomande seven minutes earlier did not draw intervention from VAR. Iturralde Gonzalez said that the difference in treatment raised a question about consistency, and he used the comparison to argue that the debate about VAR should cover all incidents in the same way. The criticism was reported as the view of a former referee, and it added a second strand to the debate, alongside the technical question about the connected ball.
Kinexon Connected Ball LaLiga Doubt and the Reported Synchronisation Difference of One or Two Frames
The connected ball was presented as a tool that would reduce debate about offside decisions, because the chip inside the ball would give a precise signal for the moment of the kick. The reported synchronisation difference has raised the opposite effect in the reporting, because it has given critics a reason to question decisions that were previously treated as settled by technology. Iturralde Gonzalez said that, with the connected ball, supporters were promised an end to debate, but the reported margin of error has reopened the debate in a stronger form. The reporting does not say that the technology is useless, and it does not say that every decision was wrong, but it does say that the margin must be understood and explained with clarity.
Athletic Club Real Sociedad Derby Penalty Review and the Background to the Kinexon Connected Ball LaLiga Doubt
The background to the new development is the RFEF review of the penalty decision in the Athletic Club 2-1 win against Real Sociedad in the Basque derby, which was covered in an earlier report on this site. The review found that the decision may not have been correct, and that finding created the context for the request for a report from Kinexon. The new reporting does not say that the penalty decision was overturned, and it does not say that the result of the derby was changed. The result of the derby stands, and the debate is about the process that led to the decision and about the wider reliability of the technology used in similar decisions across LaLiga.
What the Reported Kinexon Findings Mean for Marginal Offside Decisions Up to Matchday 11
The question raised by Iturralde Gonzalez about marginal offside decisions up to Matchday 11 is a question, not a proven conclusion, and it should be reported in that form. He said that he did not know whether offside decisions up to that point were legitimate or not, given the reported margin of one or two frames. The comment reflects the uncertainty created by the admission, rather than evidence that a specific decision was incorrect. For clubs, players and supporters, the uncertainty is uncomfortable, because offside decisions can decide goals, points and positions in the table. For the authorities, the challenge is to give a clear and technical explanation that restores confidence, or to accept that the system needs adjustment.
The debate will continue in the coming days, and the focus will be on the response from the Technical Committee of Referees, from Kinexon and from LaLiga. The reporting has placed the issue in the public domain, and the expert criticism from Iturralde Gonzalez has ensured that the question will not disappear quickly. The key facts for readers are the reported admission of a slight synchronisation difference, the request for an urgent report, and the warning that doubt has been planted. The key caution is that none of the reporting establishes that results were manipulated, and none of the reporting overturns the result of the Basque derby. The story is about reported doubt and reported technical findings, and it must be read in that form until the authorities give a fuller explanation.
| Reported detail | Figure or fact |
|---|---|
| Company behind the ball chip | Kinexon |
| Report requested by | Technical Committee of Referees, urgent report |
| Reported synchronisation difference | One or two frames between the ball signal and VAR video |
| Time equivalent | 20 to 40 milliseconds |
| Background match | Athletic Club 2-1 Real Sociedad, Basque derby, penalty review |
| Period questioned by the expert | Marginal offside decisions up to Matchday 11 |
| Time gap in the Tebas criticism | Seven minutes between the Diomande incident and the Mbappe incident, as reported |
