halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,439
Accountants!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
VAR Discussion Thread - 2023/24 | PL clubs to vote on whether to scrap VAR (pg413)
- Thread starter MAG
- Start date
Accountants!
Gorton_Tubster
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 16,513
- Location
- Riding the blue tidal wave.
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Id love to know how many correct interventions versus incorrect interventions there are.
It feels like it gets a small majority of them wrong which is probably not true.
It feels like it gets a small majority of them wrong which is probably not true.
burning blue soul
Well-Known Member
Politicians?Probably but I wonder if more of them would be genuinely honest. They do the hardest and most important job and get nothing for it.
Maybe we could get a load of Tibetan monks. Or nuns. Or midwives. Or firemen. Or uroligists. There must be a set of people that can try to be consistent, honest and trustworthy.
jimharri
Moderator
Just read this morning that Haaland said that it should have been ruled out, and that he'd be raging if he was them.
abu13
Well-Known Member
While i think the vast majority if blues believe the 2nd goal should have been ruled out, VAR wasnt the issue, the wording of the offside rule is wrong. The officials applied the rules yesterday but it doesnt sit right with me.
So glad it didnt end up 2:1
So glad it didnt end up 2:1
RiversideBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2020
- Messages
- 2,208
- Team supported
- Man city
He got it bang on. We would.Just read this morning that Haaland said that it should have been ruled out, and that he'd be raging if he was them.
jimharri
Moderator
Agreed. I can imagine the corruption/agenda posts on here if it had happened at the other end!He got it bang on. We would.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
Agreed. I can imagine the corruption/agenda posts on here if it had happened at the other end!
Yup. Should have been ruled out.
give it to gordon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 17,935
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I didnt celebrate the second goal as I was 100% certain it was off side.
I have no idea what the off side or hand ball rules are nowadays.
If our second was scored against us like the Rashford/Ratface goal I would be well pissed of !.
Have seen the goal on tv now I can see why the goal was given as the keeper had a clear view and didn't affect his dive. Unlike Rashford/Ratface were eddy is set up to save a Rashford shot.
I have no idea what the off side or hand ball rules are nowadays.
If our second was scored against us like the Rashford/Ratface goal I would be well pissed of !.
Have seen the goal on tv now I can see why the goal was given as the keeper had a clear view and didn't affect his dive. Unlike Rashford/Ratface were eddy is set up to save a Rashford shot.
Gordyola
Well-Known Member
The Ake goal, and the one in the derby, wasn't anything to do with VAR. The role of VAR in these situations is ONLY to determine a fact, is the player offside which is exactly what it did.
For both, VAR wasn't really necessary the player was clearly offside. VAR would have been used to double check other possible incidents leading up to the goal
Both goals were awarded by the on-field ref who, again for both, consulted the linesman to confirm his view that the player in question was not interfering with play.
Argument should be about the law and how it determines interfering, for what its worth looking at the criteria Akanji wasn't guilty Rashford was Yesterday the GK dived regardless of Akanji, at OT there were numerous interfering offences well argued on here
Are the guidelines wrong? Probably but they stand and most people, including the experts, don't bother to read them judging the situation on their own belief how how it should be interpreted
Coincidentally Oliver was the VAR at OT and ref yesterday
For both, VAR wasn't really necessary the player was clearly offside. VAR would have been used to double check other possible incidents leading up to the goal
Both goals were awarded by the on-field ref who, again for both, consulted the linesman to confirm his view that the player in question was not interfering with play.
Argument should be about the law and how it determines interfering, for what its worth looking at the criteria Akanji wasn't guilty Rashford was Yesterday the GK dived regardless of Akanji, at OT there were numerous interfering offences well argued on here
Are the guidelines wrong? Probably but they stand and most people, including the experts, don't bother to read them judging the situation on their own belief how how it should be interpreted
Coincidentally Oliver was the VAR at OT and ref yesterday