United (A) | Post Match Thread

[Newquayblue]

Watched the game again this morning......yeah i know i am a sadist.

Not going to go on about that abomination of a goal that was allowed to stand. It changed the game.

Still.......It was evident to me watching that first half again. We were playing well within our selves. The focus being on Ball retention and obsessively keeping possession. Nullifying the Rags threat. Players always passing to the side, and back. Watch Bernado closely he sees Haaland run after a quick pass, zero interest from Bernado backwards goes the pass.

That is not accident. This is the team being sent out by the manager purely to focus on getting to half time 0-0 and go on from there second half. Wasting a full half playing slow, dull, insipid robotic football. It is awful football, cowardly as well. Unbelievably We were playing with fear to contain the Rags.

Many would rather blame the players than the manager.

How are they supposed to to change the game when Pep is obsessed more with retaining possession at all costs ?.Look at the players faces when they make a shit pass,they look terrified, they are playing with anxiety rather than flair.

2 games with virtually zero shots on goal, is both incredible, and criminal, given our talent..

Why even bother playing Haaland if the game plan is to simply grind out first half defensively against a shit Rag side who only threat is Trashford.That was there only threat, and he couldn't even nullify that.

Then we finish the game with a World Cup winning striker Alvarez still sat on the Bench.

It is like Pep sulks, and becomes incapable of thinking logically when it is not going his way. It is not a one off either. Every Champions League campaign ends the same way.

I am worried he is unravelling, and a few players have had enough playing his style.

We need to up our game against Spurs or another defeat is nailed on.

Nonsense!

 

[Corky]

If he isn't shielding it then it gets mopped up.

 

[Dirty Harry]

apparently VAR not involved in the decision because subjective decision (what the Ref thought).

So VAR don’t check every goal then (as I’ve always been led to believe) or do I have that wrong ?

 

[Newquayblue]

I have read them and listened to the opinions of others not on here. My opinion whether you like it or not is the same. Goal legit by the rules......rules wrong. IF you want to bring FACTS into it then IF you follow the rules I'm closer to facts than others. ( the rules as I previously stared leave room for interpretation as it doesn't exactly state what interference is and some of the wording suggests physical contact....
Again I believe the rules are wrong and unhelpful ar the least.
My opinion is that the goal SHOULD NOT have stood ( said so many times) but within the LOTG it is allowed

Opinion mate - the laws allow discretion - it's the Ref's opinion that counted (obviously) - that's why VAR did not intervene. That said, in my opinion it's 'impossible' for him not to affect the outcome!

 

[ShedDweller]

Entitled mardarses ha ha, people can see we are poor this season, guardiola does have a good record, but this season he seems to have no answer to our problems

Mate, we're not at our best, had a few iffy games and a couple of bad results...
We're 2nd in the league. Pep will come up with an answer to this I have absolutely no doubt about that.
In the meantime lets stay as positive as we can (I'm no happy clapper) and put faith in Pep's talent.
Still loads of points to play for, no-ones won anything yet.

 

[Lovebitesandeveryfing]

So VAR don’t check every goal then (as I’ve always been led to believe) or do I have that wrong ?

VAR are authorised to intervene if they believe there has been a clear mistake by the ref. It's usually when they believe that the ref hasn't seen something. In this case it's impossible that he didn't see that Rashford was miles offside, that he ran towards the ball until he almost got to it, before letting Fernandes hit it.
He chose to interpret that as not interfering. In effect, he is interpreting that if you don't actually touch the ball, you're not interfering. You are not having any decisive effect on the behaviour of the players around you. The defenders, the keeper.
Enough has been said about that. We all saw what happened. I have nothing to add.

 

[Chi-town blues]

apparently VAR not involved in the decision because subjective decision (what the Ref thought).

I know but it’s var job to intervene.

 

[Newquayblue]

So VAR don’t check every goal then (as I’ve always been led to believe) or do I have that wrong ?

VAR look for 'clear and obvious error' - they do not attempt to make decisions for the Ref' - this decision is based on Atwell's 'opinion' (subjectively) - it's not a right or wrong thing - purely opinion - if he had decided it was off, that would have stood too - he's the Ref.

 

[Dirty Harry]

VAR are authorised to intervene if they believe there has been a clear mistake by the ref. It's usually when they believe that the ref hasn't seen something. In this case it's impossible that he didn't see that Rashford was miles offside, that he ran towards the ball until he almost got to it, before letting Fernandes hit it.
He chose to interpret that as not interfering. In effect, he is interpreting that if you don't actually touch the ball, you're not interfering. You are not having any decisive effect on the behaviour of the players around you. The defenders, the keeper.
Enough has been said about that. We all saw what happened. I have nothing to add.

Thanks for that, have always heard/ read on here and on TV that they automatically review every goal regardless.

 

[Newquayblue]

I know but it’s var job to intervene.

Not when the decision is discretionary mate.

 

[Newquayblue]

VAR are authorised to intervene if they believe there has been a clear mistake by the ref. It's usually when they believe that the ref hasn't seen something. In this case it's impossible that he didn't see that Rashford was miles offside, that he ran towards the ball until he almost got to it, before letting Fernandes hit it.
He chose to interpret that as not interfering. In effect, he is interpreting that if you don't actually touch the ball, you're not interfering. You are not having any decisive effect on the behaviour of the players around you. The defenders, the keeper.
Enough has been said about that. We all saw what happened. I have nothing to add.

This! Well explained.

 

[Rammy Blue]

VAR look for 'clear and obvious error' - they do not attempt to make decisions for the Ref' - this decision is based on Atwell's 'opinion' (subjectively) - it's not a right or wrong thing - purely opinion - if he had decided it was off, that would have stood too - he's the Ref.

However, when a goal has been scored that involves an offside then VAR is expected to look at the goal.

 

[Chi-town blues]

VAR look for 'clear and obvious error' - they do not attempt to make decisions for the Ref' - this decision is based on Atwell's 'opinion' (subjectively) - it's not a right or wrong thing - purely opinion - if he had decided it was off, that would have stood too - he's the Ref.

Not sure about var only steps in case of “ clear and an obvious error ” when they dissect nano of millimeters to prove their point . How is that classified as ” clear and obvious “?
Var is a weapon.

 

[nellyonthewing]

Our inability to defend is probably the worst its been since late Pelligrini.

 

[BlueMoonday]

Crying over a wall haha. It is hardly a tribute, spraying somebody's name on an ugly looking wall in the middle of a shithole. Not exactly a monument is it?

 

[eastmanc]

If he isn't shielding it then it gets mopped up.

If he isn't shielding then what the fuck else is he doing. The ref was so poor it was untrue, mind you there isn't a good one in England.

 

[eastmanc]

VAR look for 'clear and obvious error' - they do not attempt to make decisions for the Ref' - this decision is based on Atwell's 'opinion' (subjectively) - it's not a right or wrong thing - purely opinion - if he had decided it was off, that would have stood too - he's the Ref.

He's a fucking idiot.

 

[Blueknows]

VAR look for 'clear and obvious error' - they do not attempt to make decisions for the Ref' - this decision is based on Atwell's 'opinion' (subjectively) - it's not a right or wrong thing - purely opinion - if he had decided it was off, that would have stood too - he's the Ref.

How can he come to that conclusion without going to the screen to watch a replay ? Surely if the lino flags he goes off that ? What was vars involvement ? If not checking the offside ? If that's the case just do away with linos as what's the point ?

 

[Newquayblue]

However, when a goal has been scored that involves an offside then VAR is expected to look at the goal.

Yes, but they look for 'clear and obvious error' mate - not to offer opinion

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

wasnt me that mentioned facts to start

I also said Im closer to the facts (law/rule of the game)....not that i was factually correct but closer to it .....

And i can see both sides as Ive previously said.

Please put me on ignore if you dont want to read anything I put on here....I wont lose sleep over it

Your opening statement is a downright lie. Your first response to me was, it’s your opinion, not a fact.

Why should I put you on ignore? A flip flopping idiot who can’t recall what he typed yesterday is highly entertaining. I know you wouldn’t lose any sleep. Those on the edge of spectrum’s rarely do.