i personally didnt think it was !The Everton penalty overturn was correct earlier though, wasn’t it?
i personally didnt think it was !The Everton penalty overturn was correct earlier though, wasn’t it?
Me too.Soucek was being clever too getting his leg across Cash to make sure that there's contact. I thought it was very harsh personally.
Personally I thought the ball clearly changed direction, He didn't get massive contact on the ball although he did get his toe to it.I think that's just TV misinterpreting what they've said.
"No clear play on the ball" basically means even though he got a touch, it didn't meaningfully change the direction or the speed of the ball and therefore it doesn't negate the foul.
If he'd have got more on it, no foul. But the touch was deemed irrelevant because it made no real difference to Soucek's ability to play the ball.
I'm watching it on Peacock Sports, The commentary team have said that's the news that they were given as to why the penalty stands.
The problem is not VAR it is PGMOL, they are fucking useless.Oh is it?
Just a bit of a mess this whole VAR thing, If it worked they wouldn't fuck about with it as much
Think they’re trying to have the grey area where a call can go either way being “ref’s call”.
A bit like in cricket with “umpire’s call” where there is some margin for error.
That’ll never go away unless refs become robots and why the debate about where the VAR bar should be, if anywhere, will rage on ad infinitum.Yeah I was thinking on the same lines.
Will bring up the same problems though, one game refs call, next game not for a similar incident.
sorry for off-topic ,but anyone knows what happened inreims vs lille game?? seems like another very serious injury