bluemanchester
Well-Known Member
Take it you have never seen Mike Riley.
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
Somebody said that the prem are not pro dippers, and in theory they are correct
But in reality they are the only team that could finish top of the league with minimum assistance from the prem . It is fact that the prem want a new name on the trophy this season, to get anybody else apart from City on top would need massive " help" from the premier league , The interpretation of VAR that we have is, as has happened enough to give the one team that can do it, a 2 point gap within 3 games now only minimum interference is needed to maintain that gap.
But in reality they are the only team that could finish top of the league with minimum assistance from the prem . It is fact that the prem want a new name on the trophy this season, to get anybody else apart from City on top would need massive " help" from the premier league , The interpretation of VAR that we have is, as has happened enough to give the one team that can do it, a 2 point gap within 3 games now only minimum interference is needed to maintain that gap.
Colin Bells Boots
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 15,833
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Problem is, who would that be?
Halsey was the nearest to calling them out but he's probably swimming with the fishes now.
Point taken blue b4- no idea but certainly none of the paid-up PiGMOL klan sycophants.
Colin Bells Boots
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 15,833
- Team supported
- Manchester City
When Kyle Walker (then at Spurs) shoved Sterling in the back in the penalty area, Howard Webb described Raheem’s decision to stay on his feet as “unhelpful”!
Not sure too much credence should be given to anything which Webb says or doesn't do.
burning blue soul
Well-Known Member
Problem is referees are being refereed by other referees that they, themselves, will be refereeing at some point in the future. When you have your peers reviewing you, and you them, there will inevitably be some back covering going on!!Yeah but as I’ve said, 32 reviews not turned over on penalties. It’s a fucking joke, but it’s the same joke for every team. We are back to relying on the incompetence of refs watching in real time.
VAR, in theory, is the shining panacea to all the gripes and moans that we all have, but it is being overseen by human beings who will look to protect their colleagues and themselves above all others.
Even the tweaks to rules have been made by pgmol to ensure the referee is protected before the laws of the game and the spectacle of prem football!!!
That is why VAR will ultimately fail, it has been hijacked by the egos of the referees and they will not relinquish that position at the top of the power podium!
stonerblue
Well-Known Member
Ooh, have i missed summat?You'll be called a wanker and banned if the previous precedent is anything to go by so you may be waiting a while.
BlueRockape
Well-Known Member
Problem is, who would that be?
Halsey was the nearest to calling them out but he's probably swimming with the fishes now.
Nah he is in sunny spain playing golf
bluemanchester
Well-Known Member
SWP's back said: ↑
"I have to disagree, the ball ends up no where near Jesus without the touch from Laporte. As it hits him then Jesus only needs to take a touch to score and he could have hit it first time (a goal scoring opportunity).
It’s a stupid law that needs abolishing but according to the law then it’s the correct decision. I’m not sure why that’s such a controversial opinion as it’s the one held by every pundit I’ve read or listened to on podcast apart from Samuels and Castles and it’s also what PGMOL have further clarified and stuck by."
Whilst you say it is the correct decision after the VAR review what you and others who say was the correct decision ignore the push/pull on Laporte before the incident for cancelling the goal. There is no mention in the rules that after a push the player has to end up in the stands or his arm has to be hanging off, a push is a foul. Until anyone can explain why this foul is being ignored I will stick to my original thought that it should have been a penalty.
"I have to disagree, the ball ends up no where near Jesus without the touch from Laporte. As it hits him then Jesus only needs to take a touch to score and he could have hit it first time (a goal scoring opportunity).
It’s a stupid law that needs abolishing but according to the law then it’s the correct decision. I’m not sure why that’s such a controversial opinion as it’s the one held by every pundit I’ve read or listened to on podcast apart from Samuels and Castles and it’s also what PGMOL have further clarified and stuck by."
Whilst you say it is the correct decision after the VAR review what you and others who say was the correct decision ignore the push/pull on Laporte before the incident for cancelling the goal. There is no mention in the rules that after a push the player has to end up in the stands or his arm has to be hanging off, a push is a foul. Until anyone can explain why this foul is being ignored I will stick to my original thought that it should have been a penalty.
Newman Noggs
Well-Known Member
So what I see so far is that those who said Liverpool and the rags will get less penalties were wrong.
Those who said we'd get more penalties were wrong.
Only those who said that we'd have crucial goals ruled out on the flimsiest of pretexts were right.
Still, only three games in. I am assured that "these decisions will even themselves out"
Those who said we'd get more penalties were wrong.
Only those who said that we'd have crucial goals ruled out on the flimsiest of pretexts were right.
Still, only three games in. I am assured that "these decisions will even themselves out"
Florida Blue
Well-Known Member
In your paranoid mind maybe.
Graham Poll admitted it years ago. And i think he would know more about it than any of us..
Poll.... "Let me guarantee you this: none of the penalties given to Wigan Athletic, Stoke City or West Bromwich would have been awarded against Manchester United and yet they were against Norwich City. So are match officials really biased, do they deliberately favour the big teams?
The select group of referees which I served with did a lot of work with a sports psychologist, the excellent Craig Mahoney. He explained the difference behind conscious decision making and sub-conscious and that you can only really control conscious thought.
I don’t believe that any referee consciously goes out to give soft penalties against small teams but I know that they only give stone wall penalties against the biggest ones.
One of the reasons for this is that they know the fallout, from the managers and the media, if they give a soft penalty against one of the big teams and the sub-conscious mind kicks in to afford the referee a level of protection, quite naturally."