What was this?
If that is his excuse its pathetic. Fans inside the ground want to know as soon as possible. I saw him running back and I reckon someone had a word in his ear.He was presumably running back to where the offence took place?
If that goal had been "scored" in a non-televised league match, we all know what would have happened it would have stood.If that is his excuse its pathetic. Fans inside the ground want to know as son as possible. I saw him running back and I reckon someone had a word in his ear.
He was running back ready for a kick off.
If that goal had been "scored" in a non-televised league match, we all know what would have happened it would have stood.
"Let’s have the confidence to not be too forensic on our analysis," is what refereeing boss Howard Webb has said."
Fair point, I realised what I was saying far too late.When was the last non televised league match involving City?
...AND, we all know that despite all of these new implementations, obviously only designed and implemented with the sole aim of 'getting the correct decision', that some teams will still be awarded very dubious decisions that are outside of the laws of the game on a much more regular basis than all other teams.If someone told me, 6 years ago, that we would implement a system that will take closer to a decade to get right, would turn decision making upside down for that duration, would STILL allow massive injustices, and would spoil the fan experience I would have said fuckoff.
What a total clusterfuck this has all been. We're now reduced to getting decisions explained on a social media app, an auto-offside implementation HALF WAY through the season, yet more definitions of what a foul is and how it should be handled. AND, we all know it still wont work....
We (City) will just get "not enough in that scything down of Haaland in the area" whilst play continues and we try not to lose our shit on the pitch in the aftermath, whilst good old VAR choose not to tell the ref to take another look because one of the 8 camera angles is a bit inconclusive due to a defender getting in the way a little bit.This part most interested me about the changes to VAR this year....
"The video assistant referee system will have a higher bar for intervening than before.
The "referee’s call" means that the VAR should only intervene if they can "see without any doubt the on-pitch official has made a clear mistake".
Otherwise the initial decision will stand. That means fewer stoppages for marginal decisions to be repeatedly rewatched.
"Let’s have the confidence to not be too forensic on our analysis," is what refereeing boss Howard Webb has said."
That's going to lead to so much controversy surely. It doesn't make VAR less intrusive, it will just kick the can down the road. Basically letting the VAR refs decide what is a clear mistake. And couple with this mechanic of sometimes refs leaving decisions to VAR and vice versa, I think we're going see less actual decision making on crucial things.
They think they're improving things but it always come back to the basic thing of the ref needs to referee and be trusted. All they're doing is watering down the decision making process, diluting it to the point where we have amateurs making decisons, or not.