We could also argue that Argentinian goalkeeper didn't deserve a golden glove. Look at this comparison between Martinez and Livakovic:
So do you agree that Martinez deserved a golden glove reward as the best goalkeeper on the tournament?
Haven't checked the stats of the two at the World Cup but seeing what you're showing it honestly has to be said that Livakovic deserved much more and the difference is vast and it's become quite puzzling why with such disparate statistics the organizers didn't award the Croatian goalkeeper a golden glove. So do you agree that Martinez deserved a golden glove reward as the best goalkeeper on the tournament?
Being able to bring Argentina to win the World Cup should not be a reason for giving it because appearance should be the benchmark for judging this is quite disappointing and suspicious.
There were also saves that marked the final match. We can say that his save in the 120th minute was perhaps the breaking moment of the match. He also made great saves in penalty shootouts. Livakovic brought Croatia to the semi-finals. Because penalty shootout determined 2 matches. These two goalkeepers came to the fore, but in order to play in the big team, the goalkeeper needs to act like a defender when his foot needs to be smooth as well as penalty saves. These goalkeepers cannot be great team goalkeepers for now.
We all know that Martinez got the golden glove reward just because Argentina won the World Cup. However, one save in the 120th minute of the final game doesn't make someone the best goalie of the tournament. If a golden glove reward is a reward for the best goalie of the tournament, then FIFA should take into consideration all games that a goalie has played, not just the final game. I'm not saying that Martinez didn't play good or that he isn't a good goalie. I'm just saying that Livakovic probably deserved the reward more than Martinez.