Michael Oliver to ref Liverpool v City - City lodge complaint

According to the FB post after the game, the accusation was that the officials, both clubs and Sky were informed that VAR was inop for the game. Nothing I have seen subsequently leads me to believe otherwise.
So why carry on with the pretence that it was in operation. I just don’t understand why anybody would agree to that but my suspicions were raised when sky pundits (Neville) knew the var check was over before Oliver did
 
Hope the lawyers, in their questions leave no wiggle room for pgmol to explain but not explain fully.

Theres a big difference to saying their was a VAR review? to all normal VAR processes & protocols

previously used were fully exhausted, prior to VAR statement to onfield referee or something similar?

On TTA be interesting to pin riley down on his previous ambiguous statement regarding penalty not

given due to not reaching threshold for deliberate handball. As this could mean it wasnt given due

to VAR rightly or wrongly utilising distance between bSilva and TTA as being too short a distance,

rather than TTA arm in unnatural position or outside of normal silhouette to not reaching threshold?

In addition to provide official time it took for that Salah offside review to take place and provide video.
 
So why carry on with the pretence that it was in operation. I just don’t understand why anybody would agree to that but my suspicions were raised when sky pundits (Neville) knew the var check was over before Oliver did
I wouldn't put it past the PiGMOL to have installed an official in the Sky OB facility to use as a rudimentary VAR instead of the official VAR suite at Stockley Park which wasn't working. This would explain why the Sky pundits got the nod first.

If this was the case, then that puts Sky firmly in control of what the makeshift VAR referee saw on the screen, including selected angles for handball, fouls and any offside decisions.
 
The thick plottens with this news breaking tonight. Even if nothing concrete comes of it, I’m pleased to see my club acting this way.
 
I wouldn't put it past the PiGMOL to have installed an official in the Sky OB facility to use as a rudimentary VAR instead of the official VAR suite at Stockley Park which wasn't working. This would explain why the Sky pundits got the nod first.

If this was the case, then that puts Sky firmly in control of what the makeshift VAR referee saw on the screen, including selected angles for handball, fouls and any offside decisions.
So why would city go along with. Var is either in operation or it isn’t. It can’t be half arsed(even though we know that generally it is half arsed)
 
So why would city go along with. Var is either in operation or it isn’t. It can’t be half arsed(even though we know that generally it is half arsed)
They probably weren't given an option.

I'm sure they would have been informed (if indeed it was the case) that the Sky OB was being used as back up. The discrepancies I highlighted above may be what form the basis of the Club's complaint.
 
At last some action.
We’ve played Mr Nice Guy far too long and it’s got us absolutely nowhere.
Time to take a leaf out of the gpc’s book and put some fear into the f@@kers.
 

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.