Just spoke to a rag mate who said there was the Martial one and a Rashford one not given, he was raging. The highlights on SKY don’t show Rashford’s so I can only presume there’s fuck all in it, they would be going mental otherwise. The Martial one shown on the highlights is outside the box full stop, it carries on into the box but that’s completely irrelevant.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Var debate 2019/20
- Thread starter Chi-town blues
- Start date
FantasyIreland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2008
- Messages
- 64,698
I wonder how much cheering the Rags,that were celebrating VAR last week,are doing tonight?
The Lightbowne Cowboy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 6,733
- Team supported
- City
It is bent. In my opinion it is bent. Bent as a 5 bob note! You've got your opinion and I've got mine.Not bent, not a single penalty given or not given has been overturned in 25 matches in the PL so far.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,516
They should practice taking them whilst they’re at it.I think that’s all they do in training.
Ole “just get into he box and try and win some pens”
“Ok boss”
They get so many they must be playing for them.
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 30,114
Yep. They won't be overturned either.Not bent, not a single penalty given or not given has been overturned in 25 matches in the PL so far.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,516
It it carries on into the box it’s a penalty no?carries on into the box but that’s completely irrelevant.
simon23
Well-Known Member
He didn't create a goal scoring op,it brushed his arm and or the defenders arm,no-one can say for sure who it came off,it didn't change direction gabby had a lot of work to do,eric didn't create the opp or had it under control or possession of the ball
If you cannt even admit it came of Laportes arm when several players of our own have alluded to that in their comments then there is no point.
It created an opportunity accidentally (not deliverately)
https://www.mancity.com/citytv/citytv-landing
Look at the city website highlights...7:21 - 7:41 (and at about 7.40 you can clearly see it hit Laportes arm)..the corner is an outs winging corner by KDB with his right foot meaning that if noone touhes the ball it would of ended up going out of the penalty area somwhere probably to the left of where the ref is initially stood as the ball is crossed and the the right of the Number 28 spurs player....look at where the ball does end up (with GJ just near the edge of teh 6 yd aea when he takes his first touch yet Laporte is probably about a yd or two to the right and a yd in front of the penalty spot when it comes off his arm......
the ball actually changes direction completely
No.It it carries on into the box it’s a penalty no?
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,516
And mine is based on fact. The fact that no penalties have been over turned (whether given or not given) shows it’s the opposite of bent. If it was bent, then United would have had one or two extra today.It is bent. In my opinion it is bent. Bent as a 5 bob note! You've got your opinion and I've got mine.
simon23
Well-Known Member
You may as well give up as those that think they broke their own rules ruling out the goal are never going to suddenly change their view now.
I think the law is an arse but according to the IFAB link, it was rightly ruled out. It won’t just happen to us though, I hope. I’m still fucking fuming about it though.
I agree - the rule is absolutely wrong on a number of levels....i was gutted by the disallowed goal as it winning was nothing short or what we deserved...
the fact that utd had a couple of calls go against them today alos makes a mocker of some on here who have been saying all week that VAR would rule in their favour
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,516
Wrong according to this:
http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/continuation-fouls/
It’s a penalty if it continues into the box.
Also: https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf
The Law states 'If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding him inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick.'
Last edited:
If that’s correct I apologise, not my understanding of the rule and that’s not how it’s ever really been applied but I stand corrected.Wrong according to this:
http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/continuation-fouls/
It’s a penalty if it continues into the box.
Also: https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf
The Law states 'If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding him inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick.'
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,516
No drama but that’s the second united penalty not given anyway.If that’s correct I apologise, not my understanding of the rule and that’s not how it’s ever really been applied but I stand corrected.
It’s also how I’ve always understood the rule and remember it being applied (for balance).
franksinatra
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 11,146
I agree - the rule is absolutely wrong on a number of levels....i was gutted by the disallowed goal as it winning was nothing short or what we deserved...
the fact that utd had a couple of calls go against them today alos makes a mocker of some on here who have been saying all week that VAR would rule in their favour
I agree - the rule is absolutely wrong on a number of levels....i was gutted by the disallowed goal as it winning was nothing short or what we deserved...
the fact that utd had a couple of calls go against them today alos makes a mocker of some on here who have been saying all week that VAR would rule in their favour
The weekend is not over yet and people will always find reasons to support their entrenched position. VAR is anti-football for me not anti-City.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,516
Agreed.The weekend is not over yet and people will always find reasons to support their entrenched position. VAR is anti-football for me not anti-City.
Also, as we scored more goals, we’ll see it in use more. If it rules out 10% of goals across the board (for easy maths) and we score 100 per season, we’ll see ten not given. A team like Burnley may only see 4 taken off with similar percentages.
franksinatra
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 11,146
Agreed.
Also, as we scored more goals, we’ll see it in use more. If it rules out 10% of goals across the board (for easy maths) and we score 100 per season, we’ll see ten not given. A team like Burnley may only see 4 taken off with similar percentages.
I was talking to a Leeds fan about this very subject today and the myth the top clubs get all the decisions. In relation to VAR and Pens it is as you say going to impact on sides who attack more, score more goals and create more possible penalty situations. The Leeds fan (and a sensible fan) was bemoaning how they should have had an additional 4 pens already this year (obv not in relation to Var).
Last edited:
Thaksinssoldier
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 10,416
Guendouzi blatantly fouled by Van Dijk there to allow Matip to score.
VAR?
Not a fucking whiff.
VAR?
Not a fucking whiff.
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 30,114
Yep.Guendouzi blatantly fouled by Van Dijk there to allow Matip to score.
VAR?
Not a fucking whiff.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,516
I think we have to come to terms with the Fact it’s not going to over rule anything a ref misses on the pitch unless it’s an offside or an attacking handball.Guendouzi blatantly fouled by Van Dijk there to allow Matip to score.
VAR?
Not a fucking whiff.
Thaksinssoldier
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 10,416
I think we have to come to terms with the Fact it’s not going to over rule anything a ref misses on the pitch unless it’s an offside or an attacking handball.
They didn’t even call to review.
I am convinced it’s not actually in place at that kip. That red card check was all for show as there was clearly nothing to check!