Was the refs on the pitch (as it has been for 130 years) rather than var that decided those.Interpretation of Clear and obvious bullshit rule.
Egyptian pussy : tug on shirt vs Stamp on David’s foot that made him fall down .
Clear and obvious corruption.
You wouldn't be saying that if the roles were reversed,thanks for putting us straight though,where would we be without a dipper on here
Saved me the reply.Carries on inside the box and therefore penalty.
Oh I agree. I think Liverpool are reffed entirely differently to City and always have been. But that’s not a var issue. It’s the same isssue we had last year.All good mate, but I will add that the “bent” part is that we all assumed we would get the penalty situation sorted as we know we always get the bum deal, however refs are just sticking with the “not giving them to us” option which if VAR isn’t going to overrule allows them to still hurt us. With the dippers you can nailed on guarantee that Salah will continue to dive and get them given by the refs, and lo and behold they won’t get overturned, just like the one that was given for Pogba in the Wolves game.
Yep, In a way he said that var people will look at that Silva and he thinks they will learn from it and next time when Salah gets his foot trod on against city it will go to var and be overturned.
Fuck me, where did you go for your lobotomy?
If it was bent, it would be overturning some penalty decisions and not others. By overturning none, it shows itself to be pointless and impotent.
Give your head a wobble.
The problem is the myopia of fans. We’ve had plenty say Martial, Rashford, Kane and Aspa aren’t penalties but we know full well that if they were City players, the same posters would be saying they were nailed on penalties.Saved me the reply.
Oh I agree. I think Liverpool are reffed entirely differently to City and always have been. But that’s not a var issue. It’s the same isssue we had last year.
Var was meant to change that which is why I’m so pissed off with it.
Just sacking var off (rather than changing how it’s used) isn’t the answer for me as it just means a continuation of the status quo of favouring Liverpool for evermore.
I think we are misinterpreting the word ‘bent’ here as there seems to be more than definition.But we know it's bent because Swarbick said Oliver saw the Rodri incident when he didn't. So somebody is lying, either Oliver who told VAR he saw it or Swarbrick, or BOTH.
I'm not having it that Swarbrick didn't watch the incident a couple of times to see where Oliver was looking, that is his job. If somebody in any other job flat out lied like that they would be sacked in a heartbeat.
NOT every single decision needs to be bent to make a difference, you have different VARS for different games, we have no idea who they support, who these people are. A big incorrect decision here and there is all it needs to make a difference when you have 2 teams capable of getting 97 and 98 points in a season.
And if you think it's no bent fair enough, but you have Graham Poll that admitted the refs are influenced on decisions given to the bigger teams (Liverpool are bigger than us) AND influenced by the media. Which team again is all over the media for FFP cheating, linked to human rights violations, sports washing etc etc.
Lastlt, If the so called "high bar of intervention" is higher than grabbing Rodri around the neck or standing on Silvas foot, then it's going to take a serious stoods up, GBH stlyle assault for VAR to give a penalty that the ref originally didn't.
Certainly looks that way but it’s not quite as obvious as Man United Jan-May 2012.This used to be MANUre = reffed entirley differently from any other team in the PL and the Dippers have now taken over that spot!