Champions League Games 5/6 March

Discussion in 'General football forum' started by karen7, 5 Mar 2019.

  1. Dave Ewing's Back 'eader

    Dave Ewing's Back 'eader

    Joined:
    9 Mar 2007
    Messages:
    48,133
    Location:
    Upwind of the Mangrove Swamp
    I think the word that is the most useful here, LF, is 'manipulation'! Would those games have rendered a penalty at the opposite end? I think that there is zero chance of us getting a pen when the ball brushes a Schalke arm, and would PSG be gifted a pen on 90+4 had it glanced a Rag elbow? We City fans have thought for a while that Uefa is not fit to govern the game in Europe and this latest episode just confirms it for me! Uefa, and probably the PL, will use VAR to engineer preferred outcomes. The expectation that VAR, even with HMP Walton in charge of the screen, would deliver a correct decision regarding those incidents in our games over the last couple seasons where we have been clearly shafted, seems will be a 'piss in the wind' experience!

    Danny Mills last week was clearly confused with the obfuscation regarding how VAR would be used in CL games. Having read out Uefa's explanation it was clear that there was an incredible amount of scope for the ref/Uefa to come up with five or ten outcomes! The black and white that we were expecting from VAR seems to have morphed into fifty shades of grey!
     
    Lancet Fluke likes this.
  2. Gorton_Tubster

    Gorton_Tubster

    Joined:
    2 Apr 2012
    Messages:
    5,915
    Location:
    not really here
    thats because 99% of decisions are subjective. VAR should only be used for objective decisions because it seems to me they have moved the subjectivity (And possible corruption) down the line to some guy in a darkened room with who knows what going on in there.

    Does anyone know who made the call for VAR last night? It used to be the ref who we all knew had made a call, I havent got a fkin clue if someone from UEFA is in that room making those calls.

    Take it back to what it was with the ref on the pitch, leave goal line tech and leave VARS for offsides only. the rest is up to the refs interpretation, not some mysterious figure somewhere else.

    Nice to see some of those who told us believe in this shit are being quite quiet now.
     
    Sky Blue likes this.
  3. Sky bet mate I even had it ready to press myself but could bring myself to cheer them on :(
     
    Bluemoonie92 likes this.

    ADVERTISEMENT

  4. Dave Ewing's Back 'eader

    Dave Ewing's Back 'eader

    Joined:
    9 Mar 2007
    Messages:
    48,133
    Location:
    Upwind of the Mangrove Swamp
    Were this shit used properly with honourable intention and based on what is good for the game, then I think few would argue. The way it has been hijacked and peddled by the likes of Uefa and ex-referees and every VAR decision, clear or manipulative, is now on the high altar as being correct will be a major reason why fans will be turned off the game, or at least some competitions within the game. The way Uefa behaved over the Moscow game, and now this fiddling with the LotG mid-competition just confirms what a lot of City fans think of Uefa.
     
    Lancet Fluke likes this.
  5. aguero93:20

    aguero93:20

    Joined:
    21 Oct 2013
    Messages:
    74,610
    Location:
    Pep Out
    Team supported:
    Pep Out
    First goalscorer is bigger odds than anytime goalscorer.
     
  6. mad4city

    mad4city

    Joined:
    17 Sep 2005
    Messages:
    4,209
    Whilst I strongly lean towards the suspicion that VAR isn't being implemented fairly (and to our detriment, in many cases), I am still very much in favour of keeping it.
    You see, now with VAR, the controversies are being highlighted, measured and recorded.
    This is going to be a very important resource for City as things progress.

    Already, we can point to:

    * VAR reverting back to an incident on the edge of our box, in an effort to disallow Aguero's goal v Schalke.

    * VAR being used to give a very dodgy handball , penalty decision against us.

    * VAR being used to give another penalty which certainly wasn't "clear and obvious" v Schalke.

    * Aguero's goal at Wembley being disallowed when doing so wasn't "clear and obvious" either.

    That's four incidents, clearly recorded (the first three, when VAR wasn't even working properly!). It's not fun, having to suffer through the bullshit and bias but it's going to be very hard for the powers-that-be to deny there is a systematic bias if (and when) the statistics prove that we are more heavily disadvantaged than other clubs.

    The counter argument will, inevitably, propose that VAR is arbitrarily applied and beyond reproach but that becomes a very tenuous position to defend if (as I suspect) the evidence stacks up to show that one club is being inordinately scrutinized.

    And the evidence is (ahem, brace yourself because this is hilarious) clear and obvious, now.
     
  7. Bluemoonie92

    Bluemoonie92

    Joined:
    22 Jan 2011
    Messages:
    5,792
    Yeah I know that, didn't realise it would be that much difference though. Not a huge gambler tbf.
     
  8. aguero93:20

    aguero93:20

    Joined:
    21 Oct 2013
    Messages:
    74,610
    Location:
    Pep Out
    Team supported:
    Pep Out
    Usually between 3 and 5 times the odds, depending on players and teams (5 times with us for ex as we've goals across the team and score a lot, 3 times with Kane for spurs).
     
    Bluemoonie92 likes this.
  9. Gorton_Tubster

    Gorton_Tubster

    Joined:
    2 Apr 2012
    Messages:
    5,915
    Location:
    not really here
    All of those decisions were subjective and as we have seen, pundits, refs, VAR spokespeople can give faintly plausible reasons why it was correct. It's about point of view, I'd prefer to let the ref have the point of view instead of some UEFA exec in a VAR room.

    IMO none of the decisioins that have gone against City in the past would have been overturned by VARs, just because VAR is used doesnt mean it will bring honesty.
     
  10. mad4city

    mad4city

    Joined:
    17 Sep 2005
    Messages:
    4,209
    I agree. What it is doing is putting a definite metric upon the number of dodgy decisions that go against us versus the number that go for us.
    It's their own evidence. If it continues to mount up, we have evidence to argue bias in their subjectivity.
     

Share This Page