The PGMOL Apologies Thread

RodneyRodney said:
Sorry, Wolves , but the fact is , you're not Manchester United.
Sorry, but that's just the way things are.
Click to expand...

That’s actually Webbs response….

“If there's a decision you're not sure about, everyone would be impacted by the Old Trafford crowd and the fact it's Manchester United.”

Imagine saying that as the head of all the referees to ensure impartiality. It’s your fucking job not to be impacted by the team & ground.

He should be sacked on the spot for that comment alone.
 
cheekybids said:
That’s actually Webbs response….

“If there's a decision you're not sure about, everyone would be impacted by the Old Trafford crowd and the fact it's Manchester United.”

Imagine saying that as the head of all the referees to ensure impartiality. It’s your fucking job not to be impacted by the team & ground.

He should be sacked on the spot for that comment alone.
Click to expand...
Agree, wtf is Webb on about. A total disgrace !
 
I'm With Stupid said:
VAR is a review system. And it still gets it wrong. Why would it be any different if the manager instigated the review? It'd just be the same "yeah, we've checked and it's not a penalty."
Click to expand...
In other sports , when technology is used the play is stopped and the criteria is usually a defining line .In cricket for example the technology is used when the umpire has indicated a batsman has been dismissed. For example LBW , the first thing checked is for a no ball, then contact with the bat , then if the ball would have made contact with the stumps, similar checks for a catch by the wicketkeeper. In Rugby(both codes) the technology is mostly used when a try is scored, again there are defining lines, although not as clear as cricket, criteria to be checked are was it a forward pass, are any players offside, was there a foot in touch, was the ball grounded properly. It In Tennis is the ball 'in' or 'out' .The only thing is comparable in Football with this is goal line technology , the ball is either over the line or not. This imo is why the techology used in Football is is not as effective and open to interpretation and possible manipulation. This and the fact that most importantly in the other sports mentioned the Referee/Umpire clarifies the decision to the watching audience and how it was reached.
 
bernard o'silver said:
In other sports , when technology is used the play is stopped and the criteria is usually a defining line .In cricket for example the technology is used when the umpire has indicated a batsman has been dismissed. For example LBW , the first thing checked is for a no ball, then contact with the bat , then if the ball would have made contact with the stumps, similar checks for a catch by the wicketkeeper. In Rugby(both codes) the technology is mostly used when a try is scored, again there are defining lines, although not as clear as cricket, criteria to be checked are was it a forward pass, are any players offside, was there a foot in touch, was the ball grounded properly. It In Tennis is the ball 'in' or 'out' .The only thing is comparable in Football with this is goal line technology , the ball is either over the line or not. This imo is why the techology used in Football is is not as effective and open to interpretation and possible manipulation. This and the fact that most importantly in the other sports mentioned the Referee/Umpire clarifies the decision to the watching audience and how it was reached.
Click to expand...
Well yeah. The other issue is the relative impact of a refereeing decision. A single incorrect point is unlikely to be the difference between winning and losing in tennis. No betting syndicates are bribing tennis umpires. Football referees on the other hand have an insane amount of power over the result. If you want to run a corrupt league, there's no better sport to choose.
 
cheekybids said:
It’s being used totally different in the women’s World Cup. They are 100% over ruling on-field ref by trusting technology & checking every goal, penalty appeal.
Click to expand...
And so is the premier league VAR, the point was if the check deems the error was not clear and obvious then the decision stays with the onfield ref. I have no idea if C&O is in play at the WWC so if what you meant was VAR are over-ruling irrespective of clear and obvious then thanks, I wasn't aware, and if so that's a definite change in narrative
 
flook said:
And so is the premier league VAR, the point was if the check deems the error was not clear and obvious then the decision stays with the onfield ref. I have no idea if C&O is in play at the WWC so if what you meant was VAR are over-ruling irrespective of clear and obvious then thanks, I wasn't aware, and if so that's a definite change in narrative
Click to expand...

They make the rules up as they go along to suit but normally they are unified with their story. Moss has fucked up apologising when Howard was in denial mode.

Clear & obvious
Subjective

All responses to allow for them to continue with the charade. I’m a fan of VAR, for the first 50 years I’ve been told ref didn’t see it. This at least shames the cheating cunts!
 
Colin Bells Boots said:
Sky use the drama and bullshit regulary to keep their viewing figures, BUT never call for reform or accountability.

No need to ask why really.
Click to expand...
Of course SKY and the other broadcasters won't call for reform or accountability of VAR... they are the main drivers behind its corrupt implementation!

The broadcasters want their cash cow with its 6 billion Asian armchair supporters to remain relevant so they pressure the PL who in turn pressure PGMOL to make it so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.