He's still at it ? let it fucking go Buzz
Liverpool Thread | 2025/26
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
He's still at it ? let it fucking go Buzz
mexico1970
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Jun 2019
- Messages
- 33,186
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Is this tool genuinely serious?
Footsoldiers?
Fortunately this fat **** couldn't physically jump a fence and is probably heavily medicated although they shouldn't allow the wankmuppet near the internet.
Stop acting like fans of other clubs :)
horlock_was_super
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 4,180
- Location
- In complete despair at 93:19
- Team supported
- Manchester City F.C.
This is what happens when the EPL don’t use a Russian linesman.
Come to think of it, how come the skip rats play in the English league when they’re not English?
Come to think of it, how come the skip rats play in the English league when they’re not English?
KentBlue
Well-Known Member
If these cunts are English then I will relinquish my birthright and become a Pitcairn Islander, Fletcher KentBlue has a nice ring about it, but don't tell Captain Bligh.
give it to gordon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 20,432
- Team supported
- Manchester City
VAR is still a problem but you are right about the press/media.
Didn't Forest conceded from corners wrongly awarded two games on the trot ? Don't remember the outcry from the press/media over that
Lovebitesandeveryfing
Well-Known Member
Very sexy. In a “domina” kind of way…
It's funny, because I found Toni Duggan's accent a turn-off. It was just a bit too much. There's enough — and then there's too much.
Lovebitesandeveryfing
Well-Known Member
When it's them it Means More.
Lovebitesandeveryfing
Well-Known Member
You're right in a general sense. But here there was no fuck-up.
This from a guy who, I think, had something to do with Liverpool F.C.:
“If a player is not interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage, then he should be.” — Bill Shankly
give it to gordon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 20,432
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Fucking horrible fan base
Personally I think the decision was correct. If it was the other way round i wouldn't be surprised if it had been ruled out.
Would I be crying over it ? Nope.
I will admit I'm still pissed of about the Rashford 'goal'. It baffles me who he was deemed not to be interfering.
It's about media pressure and what club you play for with VAR,
A close call goes against the history clubs its war and they want answers, I hate Howard Webb, but he got it spot on, But I also feel Roinson was interfering with the keeper in the first place and then moves away and when VVD heads the ball and Roinson ducks the damage was done
TheBeautifulGame
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2022
- Messages
- 582
I have no problem with the Reds feeling undone but to make City into the bad guys here as if there's a conspiracy going on to help City is troubling.
Any time a decision like this happens, it's normal for the aggrieved party to voice discontent. But they should really keep the focus on the PGMOL, keep City out of it.
feedmpenzaandhewillscore
Well-Known Member
If it’s City influencing it and it’s all done in our favour. How do they explain Henderson handling the ball outside of his area in The FA cup final? It’s a lot more controversial than what happened last Sunday and didn’t receive the hysteria from the media on a level that this has.
We’d need to see the next frame as the ball hasn’t been kicked yet. Van Dicks feet are ok there but might not be on the next frame. As he was the one who cleared it, it will all be about him and not the player next to him who is clearly in the area. Mind you Van Dicks chest is clearly over the line so does that count? Who fucking knows! I bet the rule makers don’t
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
VAR is supposed to check any clear and obvious errors. The on-field decision was offside, so presumably VAR checked if there was an obvious error. Whether the decision was right or not, it was a subjective call and VAR didn't think there was any clear reason to decide it was an error. End of story.
As you say, had it been given, it would probably have stood for exactly the same reason.
mexico1970
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Jun 2019
- Messages
- 33,186
- Team supported
- Manchester City
TheBeautifulGame
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2022
- Messages
- 582
The problem with that argument is that there have been plenty of decisions that went to VAR that were subjective decisions which were reversed in which it wasn't established that a clear or obvious error was made. Anotherwords, they're applying this concept in this situation but they don't apply it in others. And worse, in this situation they've made it seem like VAR wouldn't even be allowed to intervene depending on the lino's decision.
Yet we keep hearing claims to the contrary, how VAR did look it at and "confirmed" it. How could they look at it and confirm it if they aren't allowed to? It has been alleged that Michael Oliver is the one who confirmed it himself which gives the impression that he merely signed off on what the assistant said without giving it the kind of scrutiny we have come to expect from VAR.
It is unacceptable to have different standards applied to different situations and I'm sorry but it is scandalous for the assistant to make such a decision if in fact that decision would have prevented the possibility of a full review which would be needed to study the incident and actually confirm whether or not he interfered.
If they are scared of making subjective offsides interference decisions through VAR then just admit it instead of creating this sham of going out of their way to hide behind on field decisions in these cases. The whole point of VAR is to correct incorrect onfield decisions but here they didn't. And the official conclusion, whether we like it or not, is that the wrong decision was made.
Putting that aside, they've attempted to justify that wrong decision being made by arguing VAR couldn't have gotten involved, or that even if they did, that they wouldn't have enough clear evidence to overturn the on field decision, which is quite the conundrum. These are obstacles to being allowed to make the correct decision. It is counter productive to accept that depending on what the lino rules on the pitch, or through a prolonged discussion with the referee, that he could prevent the possibility of a review that would be needed to determine interference, subjective as it may be. The guidelines in the LOTG are pretty clear on what constitutes interference in the VAR era. They changed the laws and made them the way they are so VAR can work and adjudicate these kind of situations. Only they can't get out of their own way in preventing the system they designed from being used property.
Marvin.
Well-Known Member
No.
Marvin.
Well-Known Member
You lost the league in Manchester.