Champions League Games 5/6 March

So did they clarify it within the week or not? I didn't see anything but that doesn't mean it didn't happen, I suppose. And presumably (going on last night) if they did clarify it then they made a media announcement to say that anything hitting the arm in the area, deliberate or not, is going to be a penalty? The fact that the timeline was that the Otamendi incident happened and then they started talking about clarifying the handball rule pretty much confirms what Clattenburg said - this new rule was literally introduced at the point the Otamendi handball was given and there had been no clarification of this new rule prior to that moment. In the middle of arguably the most prestigious club competition in the world. That is fucking shocking IMO. Even putting aside the shadiness of the sudden implementation of this new rule, I'm sorry but if that last night is now a handball then the game is significantly ruined because all that is doing is introducing an element of random jeopardy into the top level of football. They may as well stop the match, toss a coin and give one of the teams a penalty.

I think the word that is the most useful here, LF, is 'manipulation'! Would those games have rendered a penalty at the opposite end? I think that there is zero chance of us getting a pen when the ball brushes a Schalke arm, and would PSG be gifted a pen on 90+4 had it glanced a Rag elbow? We City fans have thought for a while that Uefa is not fit to govern the game in Europe and this latest episode just confirms it for me! Uefa, and probably the PL, will use VAR to engineer preferred outcomes. The expectation that VAR, even with HMP Walton in charge of the screen, would deliver a correct decision regarding those incidents in our games over the last couple seasons where we have been clearly shafted, seems will be a 'piss in the wind' experience!

Danny Mills last week was clearly confused with the obfuscation regarding how VAR would be used in CL games. Having read out Uefa's explanation it was clear that there was an incredible amount of scope for the ref/Uefa to come up with five or ten outcomes! The black and white that we were expecting from VAR seems to have morphed into fifty shades of grey!
 
thats because 99% of decisions are subjective. VAR should only be used for objective decisions because it seems to me they have moved the subjectivity (And possible corruption) down the line to some guy in a darkened room with who knows what going on in there.

Does anyone know who made the call for VAR last night? It used to be the ref who we all knew had made a call, I havent got a fkin clue if someone from UEFA is in that room making those calls.

Take it back to what it was with the ref on the pitch, leave goal line tech and leave VARS for offsides only. the rest is up to the refs interpretation, not some mysterious figure somewhere else.

Nice to see some of those who told us believe in this shit are being quite quiet now.
 
Where the fuck did they get them odds? I had a tenner on 3-1 lukaku score anytime and that was only 67/1. I could see this result coming from a mile away. It's all opening up very nicely so far.

Sky bet mate I even had it ready to press myself but could bring myself to cheer them on :(
 
thats because 99% of decisions are subjective. VAR should only be used for objective decisions because it seems to me they have moved the subjectivity (And possible corruption) down the line to some guy in a darkened room with who knows what going on in there.

Does anyone know who made the call for VAR last night? It used to be the ref who we all knew had made a call, I havent got a fkin clue if someone from UEFA is in that room making those calls.

Take it back to what it was with the ref on the pitch, leave goal line tech and leave VARS for offsides only. the rest is up to the refs interpretation, not some mysterious figure somewhere else.

Nice to see some of those who told us believe in this shit are being quite quiet now.

Were this shit used properly with honourable intention and based on what is good for the game, then I think few would argue. The way it has been hijacked and peddled by the likes of Uefa and ex-referees and every VAR decision, clear or manipulative, is now on the high altar as being correct will be a major reason why fans will be turned off the game, or at least some competitions within the game. The way Uefa behaved over the Moscow game, and now this fiddling with the LotG mid-competition just confirms what a lot of City fans think of Uefa.
 
Where the fuck did they get them odds? I had a tenner on 3-1 lukaku score anytime and that was only 67/1. I could see this result coming from a mile away. It's all opening up very nicely so far.
First goalscorer is bigger odds than anytime goalscorer.
 
Whilst I strongly lean towards the suspicion that VAR isn't being implemented fairly (and to our detriment, in many cases), I am still very much in favour of keeping it.
You see, now with VAR, the controversies are being highlighted, measured and recorded.
This is going to be a very important resource for City as things progress.

Already, we can point to:

* VAR reverting back to an incident on the edge of our box, in an effort to disallow Aguero's goal v Schalke.

* VAR being used to give a very dodgy handball , penalty decision against us.

* VAR being used to give another penalty which certainly wasn't "clear and obvious" v Schalke.

* Aguero's goal at Wembley being disallowed when doing so wasn't "clear and obvious" either.

That's four incidents, clearly recorded (the first three, when VAR wasn't even working properly!). It's not fun, having to suffer through the bullshit and bias but it's going to be very hard for the powers-that-be to deny there is a systematic bias if (and when) the statistics prove that we are more heavily disadvantaged than other clubs.

The counter argument will, inevitably, propose that VAR is arbitrarily applied and beyond reproach but that becomes a very tenuous position to defend if (as I suspect) the evidence stacks up to show that one club is being inordinately scrutinized.

And the evidence is (ahem, brace yourself because this is hilarious) clear and obvious, now.
 
Yeah I know that, didn't realise it would be that much difference though. Not a huge gambler tbf.
Usually between 3 and 5 times the odds, depending on players and teams (5 times with us for ex as we've goals across the team and score a lot, 3 times with Kane for spurs).
 
Whilst I strongly lean towards the suspicion that VAR isn't being implemented fairly (and to our detriment, in many cases), I am still very much in favour of keeping it.
You see, now with VAR, the controversies are being highlighted, measured and recorded.
This is going to be a very important resource for City as things progress.

Already, we can point to:

* VAR reverting back to an incident on the edge of our box, in an effort to disallow Aguero's goal v Schalke.

* VAR being used to give a very dodgy handball , penalty decision against us.

* VAR being used to give another penalty which certainly wasn't "clear and obvious" v Schalke.

* Aguero's goal at Wembley being disallowed when doing so wasn't "clear and obvious" either.

That's four incidents, clearly recorded (the first three, when VAR wasn't even working properly!). It's not fun, having to suffer through the bullshit and bias but it's going to be very hard for the powers-that-be to deny there is a systematic bias if (and when) the statistics prove that we are more heavily disadvantaged than other clubs.

The counter argument will, inevitably, propose that VAR is arbitrarily applied and beyond reproach but that becomes a very tenuous position to defend if (as I suspect) the evidence stacks up to show that one club is being inordinately scrutinized.

And the evidence is (ahem, brace yourself because this is hilarious) clear and obvious, now.
All of those decisions were subjective and as we have seen, pundits, refs, VAR spokespeople can give faintly plausible reasons why it was correct. It's about point of view, I'd prefer to let the ref have the point of view instead of some UEFA exec in a VAR room.

IMO none of the decisioins that have gone against City in the past would have been overturned by VARs, just because VAR is used doesnt mean it will bring honesty.
 
All of those decisions were subjective and as we have seen, pundits, refs, VAR spokespeople can give faintly plausible reasons why it was correct. It's about point of view, I'd prefer to let the ref have the point of view instead of some UEFA exec in a VAR room.

IMO none of the decisioins that have gone against City in the past would have been overturned by VARs, just because VAR is used doesnt mean it will bring honesty.
I agree. What it is doing is putting a definite metric upon the number of dodgy decisions that go against us versus the number that go for us.
It's their own evidence. If it continues to mount up, we have evidence to argue bias in their subjectivity.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.