Manchester United

[hycus-flange]

They are dog at the moment, watch them turn into prime Barcelona on Sunday, like they do against us every bloody year.

[Herman22]

 

2 minutes ago, AndyM3000 said:

He tried to go in studs up into his leg but managed to miss and hit his shin first. It's high, he's stretching and nowhere near the ball, could it be a yellow? Maybe if that was given on field.

No other club in the world gets that overturned, seen many red cards a lot softer than that not overturned. 

And the narrative will be “poor rat face is hard done by the officials” so they will give him his usual soft pen! 

The United bias in the premier league will live forever. 

[duke313]

I don’t think it was a red, surprised VAR didn’t overrule it. Who cares anyway, we’re still going to beat them.

[stewiek2]

it's Manure. Of course it's rescinded. The gutless pricks at the refs panel are still scared old Taggart will ressurect from the dead and have them bent over and pummeled.

[Ceemo]

Where's the red card that should have been given to Lisandro Martinez for his two footed lunge against Crystal Palace?

Not sure how Man United got this rescinded as although you could argue that it was a little harsh, it wasn't a terrible decision by the ref which was backed up by VAR agreeing.

[bobzy]

It's the right decision...

 

 

...but shows what a farce the system is at the moment.  VAR is pointless.

[MaVilla]

i still think it was a red.

McGinn got a red for kneeing someone off their feet when the ball had gone, rat face stuck his leg out like a parkour athlete and raked his studs down a players leg on purpose, when the ball had gone.

if McGinns was a red, rat faces was, more so.

 

[bobzy]

2 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

i still think it was a red.

McGinn got a red for kneeing someone off their feet when the ball had gone, rat face stuck his leg out like a parkour athlete and raked his studs down a players leg on purpose, when the ball had gone.

if McGinns was a red, rat faces was, more so.

 

I don't even think Fernandes' studs touched Maddison.  Was the side of his foot, in mid air after he'd slipped.  I'm not even sure it's a yellow, let alone red.

[switters]

Don't totally disagree with the overturn in isolation, looked more yellow than red. But again it's the sheer inconsistency. If they can retrospectively say this not red, why are they not retrospectively fixing terrible decisions like not giving red to Lisandro Martinez for the jumping tackle the week before. He is the one who should be on a 3 match ban right now.

And how can anyone trust the worth of VAR if they can't overturn the Fernandes one in real time? 

[villa4europe]

Just now, MaVilla said:

i still think it was a red.

McGinn got a red for kneeing someone off their feet when the ball had gone, rat face stuck his leg out like a parkour athlete and raked his studs down a players leg on purpose, when the ball had gone.

if McGinns was a red, rat faces was, more so.

Mcginn Vs spurs? All day red

This here the only way it's not a red is if they are saying that his slipping motion causes his other leg to kick out making the contact, personally I don't think it does, yes he's slipped but he's still knowingly thrown a leg out after, he does have an element of control and him slipping should mean he bailed on the attempted tackle 

[AndyClarke]

Are they a bit thick? Surely if this is rescinded then VAR must be abolished immediately on the basis that they upheld the decision.

We know it won't, we also know why it has been rescinded and worst of all, we know exactly what is going to happen on Sunday!

[MrBlack]

The ONLY reason this was overturned is due to the product. The FA are utterly corrupt. But it doesn't matter, they are still shit and will still be shit.

VAR shown up for the incompetent waste of time that it is too.

[Davkaus]

It's definitely not excessive force, is it?

But if we've got a different threshold for var reviews and for appeals, things are in a very messed up state imo.

[VillaChris]

59 minutes ago, turvontour said:

I'm confused, are they saying that it isn't a red card? 

I watched it and thought it was a red card. The ref watched it and thought it was a red card. And VAR watched it and thought it was a red card.

Does someone else think it wasn't?

TBF since VAR came in we appealed two Douglas Luiz red cards against Palace and Fulham respectively and won on both occasions so it's not like a helping Man. United thing at all (and Fernandes is in terrible form)

From memory Luiz was supposed to have gone in two footed at Palace but replays showed it wasn't and so he didn't have to serve a three match ban. The Fulham match was I think some sort of headbutt on Mitrovic but again replays showed there was hardly any contact, bizarre they didn't just correct it on the night.

[VillaChris]

On 30/09/2024 at 14:05, HanoiVillan said:

Agree Emery won't be interested; there's the Arsenal experience, there's the fact everything is set up for him here with exactly the backroom staff and set-up he feels comfortable with, and there's the reality that we frankly have better players than they do at this point. 

I think that's not true about PSR though; my understanding is their position will improve substantially next season and they'll have quite a lot of headroom to spend. 

Martyn Ziegler in the Times today said they'll run into issues with Uefa PSR. There's a kit deal with Adidas coming into force for 25-26 and it's a 10m penalty clause if they miss CL for two consecutive seasons.

They basically need to win the Europa league.

[tom_avfc]

10 minutes ago, AndyClarke said:

Are they a bit thick? Surely if this is rescinded then VAR must be abolished immediately on the basis that they upheld the decision.

We know it won't, we also know why it has been rescinded and worst of all, we know exactly what is going to happen on Sunday!

The VAR got it completely wrong. It was a ridiculous decision that has been rightly overturned.We had the same with Douglas Luiz against Fulham which was subsequently rescinded.

I’m more surprised they’ve actually done this rather than try to protect the VAR.

[Czarnikjak]

55 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It's definitely not excessive force, is it?

But if we've got a different threshold for var reviews and for appeals, things are in a very messed up state imo.

It's still that silly "clear and obvious" error for VAR, stopping them from overruling anything but blatantly obvious mistakes. It's more pragmatic approach for appeals. 

So in this instance referee made a mistake, VAR wasn't allowed to do anything about it but appeal process worked as expected.

[S-Platt]

31 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

It's still that silly "clear and obvious" error for VAR, stopping them from overruling anything but blatantly obvious mistakes. It's more pragmatic approach for appeals. 

So in this instance referee made a mistake, VAR wasn't allowed to do anything about it but appeal process worked as expected.

How about you get to appeal during the game like cricket.   If it's so obvious and VAR are too spineless to go against their mate on the pitch why do you have to wait 3 days to prove they are useless.

[OutByEaster?]

They're not appealing the decision of a foul, they're satisfied with that, they're appealing the opinion of the referee on the force and intent of that foul and the corresponding opinions of the VAR officials on the same incident - appealing an opinion is a very odd thing, because all you're really doing is giving your own opinion on an incident and in this case saying that your opinion is more important than the opinions of those that are paid to make the decision.

It shouldn't come as any great surprise that the Premier League agree that the opinion of Manchester United is more important than the opinions of referees.

[HanoiVillan]

We're arguably better off if he plays, he's in bad form and his presence seems to give them a worse midfield shape off the ball.