Ref Watch

[threadkiller]

We need an independent time keeper and a minimum of 60mins to be played! It will stop all this time wasting because it will be a waste of time!

Unless the purpose is to break up attacking momentum.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Is it me or are they doing less and less to even try and disguise it now.

No consequences

 

[ZanteWeatherman]

If that’s not proof of corruption in the game I don’t know what is, that’s beyond incompetence. Haven’t seen many worse decisions than that, probably worse than Man Utd’s offside goal against us.

Clear and obvious. Simples.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

It’s bent, no doubt about it.

I’d be genuinely interested whether anyone actually thinks matches are not being deliberately influenced

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

Just watched the Gundo penalty again.The Leeds defender who clears the ball has his foot on the line of the penalty area at the moment the ball is struck.On the line is in the box,therefore should have been retaken.Unsurprisingly no VAR intervention

I said that to the lad after watching the game back yesterday, the line belongs to the Penalty box and at least five Leeds players where touching/over it, given they got to the ball first on the rebound then a retake should’ve been ordered

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

We need an independent time keeper and a minimum of 60mins to be played! It will stop all this time wasting because it will be a waste of time!

No, it has always been 90 minutes so that is what should be played

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

The rule only applies to a player who has a direct impact - in this case it looks like only the guy who clears it has any impact, and he wasn't in the penalty area, or on the line.

Really ? Never knew that, if that’s the case teams may as well ask a player to encroach but not look to intervene, which in turn would encourage the attackers to pile in and risk encroachment

 

[old blue]

Then why are the players made to stand outside the penalty area until the ball has been kicked.

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

Took a few stills from the YouTube highlights with Ali Mann and he does state VAR has implied encroachment, the only way you can row back on that is if a City player is doing the same, which doesn’t appear to be the case, and it does look like the player who cleared the ball encroaches, I realise I’m clutching but rules are rules, and in this day of every decision being forensically examined, it should of been a retake

 

[bluenova]

Really ? Never knew that, if that’s the case teams may as well ask a player to encroach but not look to intervene, which in turn would encourage the attackers to pile in and risk encroachment

I'm all for going with that as it sounds like it will create some ridiculous situations.

Anyway, I deleted the comment you replied to, as I was wrong - the player who cleared it was encroaching - so it should have been retaken.