Would Vinicius' goal have counted if Messi had scored it?

We all saw what happened during Brazil's 3-0 victory over Scotland on June 24 at the Hard Rock Stadium in Miami. Well... if not everyone, we Brazil fans certainly did. Several times, in fact. And with every replay, our spectacularly biased jury became a little more convinced of the same verdict.

Our Vinicius had been done dirty.

Now, before you start questioning the credibility of this distinguished panel of judges, and rightly so, allow us to walk you through the evidence that led us to this entirely emotional conclusion.

Like any responsible investigative body, we began with the available footage.

We have watched that disallowed Vinicius goal so many times that we are now only one FIFA accreditation card away from applying for the VAR room ourselves (we are not even kidding!). We have paused the footage at frames so brief they barely qualify as time itself. Every conceivable angle has been inspected, replayed, and argued over.

Believe it or not, we were not looking for evidence to confirm our bias. We were desperately searching for that one magical frame that would finally convince us that Vinicius' pressing was, in fact, a foul. That one perfect angle where everything would suddenly make sense, and we could finally admit, "Fair enough... the referee got this one right."

Except that moment never came.

Instead, every replay somehow made us more convinced we were right, and increasingly suspicious that everyone else, including referees, opposition fans, and perhaps the entire VAR room, needed an eye test.

Because then came the comparison clips.

One Messi clip became two. Then another. Before we realised what had happened, we were no longer reviewing Vinicius' goal. We were conducting a full-scale audit of football's memory.

And just like that, the debate quietly stopped being about Vinicius altogether. It became the question modern football cannot resist asking whenever controversy strikes:

"Would it still be a foul if Messi had done it?"

We don't know. Quite frankly, we don't particularly wish to know either.

Because it's rather depressing that this has become football's preferred method of analysing controversial decisions.

Somewhere between the referee's whistle and the internet's verdict, every incident now requires a hypothetical Messi reenactment, as though the rules of the game come with a celebrity reference section.

And somehow, the conversation quietly stopped being about Vinicius altogether.

The man turned up, scored twice, terrorised Scotland's defence for ninety minutes, had another goal ruled out, and somehow ended the night as a supporting character in yet another Lionel Messi debate.

Which is a shame, because the performance itself deserved better.

As far as we Brazil fans are concerned, Vinicius completed his hat-trick in Miami. FIFA may insist it was only two, but football has never been judged solely by official records. Sometimes, the most memorable goals are the ones fans simply refuse to let disappear.

Now, back to Messi. Not because we wanted to drag him into this, but because modern football simply refuses to let us leave him out.

And that's the peculiar thing. He stopped being just a footballer years ago. He's now football's default benchmark. Every controversial incident is instinctively held up against him, as though the rules come with a handy appendix, titled: "Now compare it with something Messi once did."

Is a goal disallowed? "Would Messi have got it?"

Isn't a penalty given? "Messi would've won it."

So, when reports emerged that Brazil had cited a Messi incident in their complaint, we, the fans, didn't even blink. After all, when one player's pressing is applauded as footballing intelligence while another's is punished as a foul, supporters can hardly be blamed for wondering whether football has developed two different rulebooks: one for Messi, and another for everyone else.

So, until football offers a more convincing explanation for this rather persistent fan suspicion, we will continue asking the question it wrote for itself: would it still have been a foul if Messi did it? We genuinely hope the answer isn't "no."