Davkaus Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago Just now, duke313 said: They’re going to be knocking on the door for top 4 though, or so I was told. They're going to need to sign Stretch Armstrong to reach the door from where they end up 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago Not even VAR could miss that penalty surely? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago What the f is happening That's the most blatant penalty in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MachoFantastico Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago That's a penalty surely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago Teams with big money hey? It's getting a bit obvious now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MachoFantastico Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago Laughable decision, how is that not a penalty? It's a complete joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAZZAM Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago (edited) Yeh I think that was a pen. Cant just stop people by holding there arm. Don't matter if he goes down or not Andy Townsend ffs. Edited 4 hours ago by KAZZAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago At least Wham had a great transfer window apparently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago They're "backing the onfield decision" more so it's basically legalised corruption like clear and obvious which means they can step in when they like.....or not. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago I can't wait to see how pmgol try to gaslight us over that one. It's a **** joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MachoFantastico Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago 2 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: Teams with big money hey? It's getting a bit obvious now. They don't even hide it at times. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calcifer Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago So because they don't want to overrule the on field decision, even though it was a blatant penalty, what was the point of VAR checking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAlex Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago You're allowed to foul a player as long as you're holding their hand. Just like how you can score if offside miles behind a defence if they try to intercept the ball (Man City away). Or how you can get a penalty for standing on a defenders ankle. (Man Utd home). Come on guys it's in the rules. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calcifer Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago 1 minute ago, rodders0223 said: They're "backing the onfield decision" more so it's basically legalised corruption like clear and obvious which means they can step in when they like.....or not. Yep! 100% pretty much my view on this new ruling. If they was Chelsea it would have been a penalty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedClaretAndBlue Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago Sick of these decision makers in VAR. Non Corrupt, competent officials would suggest the Referee go to the screen for that incident so he alone can correct a mistake or double down. Dont like VAR operators controlling the narrative with the words they relay in his ear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago I dont know why a manager doesnt take his players off the pitch to highlight the corruption I still think we should have done in that City game when rules made up on the spot 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rightdm00 Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago Ref saw the foul live and determined none. VAR is just there to determine if he made a clear error. I would be pissed if the ref let that go but then VAR overruled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago If that's not worth correcting, are we at the point where they'll only jump in if the ref didn't see it or gets something factually wrong? Or is that just for this game, because they seem to be making it up as they go along Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago 1 minute ago, Rightdm00 said: Ref saw the foul live and determined none. VAR is just there to determine if he made a clear error. I would be pissed if the ref let that go but then VAR overruled. The ref did make a clear error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted 4 hours ago Share Posted 4 hours ago 1 minute ago, Rightdm00 said: Ref saw the foul live and determined none. VAR is just there to determine if he made a clear error. I would be pissed if the ref let that go but then VAR overruled. If a trained ref gets a clear view of that and thinks it's not a foul, they need volleying in the jaw. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts