To be fair if VAR was in play, we certainly would have conceded a penalty at Arsenal when the score was 1-0.........just saying playing "Devils advocate".
VAR would have struck off their goal, denying them the boost that going a goal up gave them, and leaving us the chance to score once to collect three points rather than one. The point is VAR eradicates clear errors and I'm in favour of that whether it benefits us or not.Cannot have it both ways. If their goal is disallowed, ours goal doesn,t occur.
yes , your point is????? Did you watch the game?
There goal would have been disallowed and we probably would have got a pen for the push in the back on Silva.How would we have won with VAR yesterday?
The Mendy challenge should have been a pen. As should the challenge on Silva.This is where blue tinted glasses come into play, a few on here were saying no pen for the Mendy incident, but Silva & Sergio's were def pens. These very posters would say the total opposite if these decisions were the other way round.
Perhaps we should incorporate allowing sides to score against us into our tactical planning because on the balance of probability this is probably a good thing?Maybe in this alternate reality, it gets chalked off by VAR. We continue to play, the Wolves keeper makes another few great saves and we miss a load of sitters. Then Wolves score a legitimate goal in the 93rd minute, on the break, as we're committing men forward. We get no points.
If that goal was chalked off, it gives us no guarantees of anything.
To say 1-1 minus a goal for bad a decision, automatically gives the other team 3 points, is interesting logic.