Var debate 2019/20

[MillionMilesAway]

To what end? They'll be dealing with it behind closed doors or in other ways, as they usually do with things like this. The club know lots of things that they haven't gone public about.

And it won't come as any surprise to know that we aren't the PL's favourite club anyway so something as big as that definitely wouldn't endear us to the powers that be.

Pretty much. I assume there's some kind of understanding to keep things in private too.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Think about that for a minute. The Times (owned by Murdoch) wants VAR, which is used by the PL and financed largely by Sky (which is owned by Murdoch) binned. Of course they fucking do and it should tell you everything you need to know.

Isn't Sky now Comcast?

 

[Blue Til Death]

Isn't Sky now Comcast?

**** cast you mean??

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Isn't Sky now Comcast?

Wasn't sure whether that had gone through but i think you're right. They're the majority shareholder I think, with Fox as minority shareholder. The principle is the same though, which is that the big (media) players and officials don't want VAR. It gets in the way.

 

[city2]

Var will be scrapped when Liverpool win the league this season,

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Wasn't sure whether that had gone through but i think you're right. They're the majority shareholder I think, with Fox as minority shareholder. The principle is the same though, which is that the big (media) players and officials don't want VAR. It gets in the way.

I thought it was fully owned now, but that's not important.

I may have misinterpreted your point - by "in the way", do you mean of the general event of a football match? Or in the way of something else? I took your earlier post to mean "they want it gone because it's ruining the game and putting people off".

Certainly the leak of Riley's "well pleased" opinion to the ref team suggests that the tide is turning fast against him.

 

[dennishasdoneit]

The only way this shite is going away is if fans stop going to games, I reckon. I'm not convinced the club owners care that much about it, because they are only bothered about the balance sheet.

Ive always thought this mate.

 

[dennishasdoneit]

It's the first time i can remember this season that a contentious decision hasn't been seen and analysed on TV. Bit naughty really i can't believe that they can get away with this; i suppose if they admitted to it not being functional on the day it would probably have been a nail in the VAR coffin (which is a shame because i think VAR is a great addition it's just been implemented really poorly and by a bunch of arrogant, holier than though tossers)

I think ,with respect your skirting around the issue.
How can a video sysytem "not work"...i mean think about it..at what point did they discover this...5 mins before k.o?..lol
Why didnt sky announce it to all their paymasters. Ie the viewing public...its a huge story, a huge game and a huge media outlet stayed quiet
And..all you can say is " its a bit naughty"...its a disgrace.its corruption.its blatant cheating.its prob handed liverpool the title.

 

[marco]

Ive always thought this mate.

its a slow response by fans,some or a few will drop out because of VAR then others will drop out because the seats around them are empty and so on,this over a few seasons,it needs some sort of supporter based protest via the football supporters federation to move things along,not sure if they have anything planned or not

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I thought it was fully owned now, but that's not important.

I may have misinterpreted your point - by "in the way", do you mean of the general event of a football match? Or in the way of something else? I took your earlier post to mean "they want it gone because it's ruining the game and putting people off".

Certainly the leak of Riley's "well pleased" opinion to the ref team suggests that the tide is turning fast against him.

I meant they want it gone because it has the ability to make them much more accountable and lay bare stuff like what happened on Sunday.

To make it clear, I don't think the second handball incident should have been a penalty as it didn't meet the criteria for awarding one but the first definitely did. Arm moving towards the ball, in an unnatural position, not close enough to Bernardo for it to be unavoidable.

And I'm not even particularly bothered about whether Salah was onside or offside as the attacker should be getting the benefit of the doubt when it's that tight. But I'd like consistency and the laws of the game to be applied whereas I don't think the PL & Sky do.