Ref Watch

What also struck me yesterday, watching on Bein and every time one of ours went down in penalty box they said VAR had reviewed and said no penalty. But commentators said it’d been checked within literally a couple of seconds. Is that possible.
I would love to know if reviews are recorded for auditable purposes. If so I would love to know VAR review time for favourable and unfavourable city decisions. I reckon if it was possible to anonymise the players and teams involved and sent to referees 12 months later you’d get different outcomes.
F#cking got to me the cheating on Saturday. Will take a while to go. No faith in the process any longer
 
What also struck me yesterday, watching on Bein and every time one of ours went down in penalty box they said VAR had reviewed and said no penalty. But commentators said it’d been checked within literally a couple of seconds. Is that possible.
I would love to know if reviews are recorded for auditable purposes. If so I would love to know VAR review time for favourable and unfavourable city decisions. I reckon if it was possible to anonymise the players and teams involved and sent to referees 12 months later you’d get different outcomes.
F#cking got to me the cheating on Saturday. Will take a while to go. No faith in the process any longer

Same on BT - the confirmation about VAR looking at was very quick all through the match. I didn't es[ecially identify that it was skewed or not towards one team, just that it was quick.
 
VAR - on what grounds?

e.g.
Atwell - "in my opinion, MR did not interfere with any players, and I had clear view".
VAR - "You're sure about that?"
Atwell - "yes, I'm sure. the flag was raised because he thought MR played the ball, and as that doesn't apply, there is no offside"

The trouble is that it's a subjective opinion, there's no clear instance. VAR needs to be able to identify an error to recommend a review, and it's really difficult to do so on subjective matters.
On the grounds that Rashford ‘did’ interfere with play:-

I. By running alongside the ball (within inches) for several metres, most offsides of this nature are given when a player simply moves towards the ball when in an offside position, imho the linesman considered him offside via interference
2. By raising his arms in a defensive position i.e. to hold off a defender, which is interference
3. Raising his foot to intimate he was going to strike the ball, causing hesitation in defending & forcing the GK to take shape for a shot

You then had a situation where both officials disagreed in respect of interference, in that instance VAR should’ve stepped in to clear the matter up one way or another. The referee (from his distant position) would have to say categorically that he was satisfied all three of those instances where negative, there’s no way he could do that, and that’s why VAR should of interjected. We are all used to the terms they use ‘clear & obvious’ etc etc, that wasn’t subjective, the officials weren’t aligned, it was a clear & obvious mistake and the ref should’ve been made to address it on his monitor at the very least
 
Same on BT - the confirmation about VAR looking at was very quick all through the match. I didn't es[ecially identify that it was skewed or not towards one team, just that it was quick.
Maybe but my recollection was we had more potentials. Just seemed oddly quick. Not saying they were pens, soft probably
 
Maybe but my recollection was we had more potentials. Just seemed oddly quick. Not saying they were pens, soft probably
Soft yes, but each a potential penalty, remember Kyle Walker being called an idiot? Think it was the infamous Leicester game, where ‘contact’ was deemed enough to award a penalty, how many has Salah won through contact? Vardy is another one
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.