As long as @BlueHammer85 is still trying to claim that Jesus was denied a penalty correctly because of some slight touch before being taken down he should be ignored on all football talk.
Like Milner on Foden for a clear penalty (if inside) or a red (if outside)?good post.
that really is shambolic and that match commander should be forced to explain why he gave that decision.
it’s really the opposite to what I want and I hope they’ve learnt from that that only the official VAR refs can give verdicts. Could it be a case of a huge embarrassing mix up? Or is it plain corruption? I really don’t know, I hope for the sake of the game I love it’s not the latter.
As I say and stand by though, all I want is a ref who is unsure of a decision or didn’t see the incident to get some help, whether viewing a monitor or asking other officials with better angles.
if there’s corruption involved - it’s highlighted more with VAR.
As long as @BlueHammer85 is still trying to claim that Jesus was denied a penalty correctly because of some slight touch before being taken down he should be ignored on all football talk.
Haha! I'm not overly arsed about your defence of VAR, you've held your own on this thread and kudos for that.in that case I will take the walk of shame and bow down from this thread
I tried to make some reasonable cases and honest opinion why I prefer VAR (which isn't perfect) over officials making blind decisions but it seems either way, the game is corrupt and all the powers are against City only.
good common sense there. If those decisions were against City there would be uproar from City fans.right, I'll give this my honest and best shot
no doubt it's a waste of time because you will give me a barage of abuse and call me a wum etc, also you will never accept VAR and believe the games corrupt. so in a way it's like trying to teach an anti vaxxer the benefits of a vaccine.
anyhow. lets go
So now we have VAR I presume we just have to accept the shit decisions they churn out now do we ?
very good question. I would say not - but you do have to accept people and officials see things different to your perspective - like many city fans on here would say a certain incident was a foul or wasn't - there are many grey areas in football and so so many factors when decisions are taking into account. I believe VAR is the best way to reduce the amount of 'wrong' decisions but can accept there's no way of getting everything 100% correct, i would still prefer the reduced option over loads wrong.
Jesus's none penalty yesterday
I've watched the incident, at first clear penalty - but on slow mo., Telles does get a touch to the ball, it is the faintest of all touches but he definitely gets the ball first and Jesus goes over. if there was no touch to the ball, I believe VAR would have gave it. if there was NO touch to the ball and no VAR the ref as shown would not have given it.
Ronaldo's tackle on KDB, no red card
I would like to have seen a Red for this, just because it's pure petulance from Ronaldo - obviously frustrated City running rings around Utd all day, I agree with Sinclair on this - it is a 'coward’s challenge' , I think he gets away with it as KDB already going down from previous challenge and slid in 1 foot. still, i'd like ref to gave that red.
Brighton's offside goal
i can't find the footage for this. Dermot Gallagher explains as follows. i don't know, cant find it to judge.
“People will say ‘why wasn’t the offside given in the build-up’, well I think it’s too far back. It's not a time issue, it's about whether the defence have a chance to reset."
“If you watch, the ball goes back, it goes sideways and it goes back again, so the decision is they have time to reset so they don’t go that far back to the offside.”
Milner's none sending off
No argument here, 100% a yellow card and should of been off, the ref saw it clearly and bottled it.
Laporte's sending off
Zaha would have been through on goal and he was last man, i can see why given.
So using your logic, without VAR we could quite easily conclude that all of the above would have have been called correctly then?
without VAR the list of bad decisions over a weekend wouldn't fit on this page, now bad decisions are majorly highlighted (and rightly so) because of VAR
Football is suffering with the addition of the shitshow that is VAR.
Is it though ? are attendances down ? are viewing figures down ? Football is absolutely huge and that's why billionaires are buying mid table clubs in the prem. VAR has not dented the enjoyment level for most, i totally understand many don't prefer it though.
When it's taking 3 minutes to award / disallow a goal then the game has gone..
This was the case last season, but this season ? the speed of decision has massively increased and will look at ways to increase over time. it's improving a lot.
Our manager knows exactly what's going on.
Then why can he not clearly explain and really call it that there is corruption ? why is he allowing Man City to play if he knows the officials are actively against the club - honestly, i would want him to do this if he knows something and has proof. All managers moan about refs decisions, var decisions etc. Klopp was saying VAR was against them against West Ham the other day.
I would have thought you'd take the time to learn a bit about City to be honest, watch a game or two
Love watching City, saw that game v united, was like watching a training match. will try and take note in future of refs decision etc , but i do think all clubs feel hard done by and that the refs against them
this is interesting to follow and updates
How VAR decisions have affected every Premier League club in 2021-22 (espn.co.uk)
totally accept I’m in the minority on this one on here.
If the defender touches it first it isnt a pen. That is just fact surely? Or are you saying that even if a City pklayer had done that you would be saying it is a penalty?Haha! I'm not overly arsed about your defence of VAR, you've held your own on this thread and kudos for that.
It's the Jesus non penalty that you think was the right decision which has led me to this sad, but unavoidable conclusion.
Sorry Mark - will see you in the next top 100 list you do though :-)
No its not a fact that if a player gets some of the ball before taking out a player it's not a foul.If the defender touches it first it isnt a pen. That is just fact surely? Or are you saying that even if a City pklayer had done that you would be saying it is a penalty?
No its not a fact that if a player gets some of the ball before taking out a player it's not a foul.
I'd also be screaming it was a fair tackle and not a pen if the roles were reversed but I'd be wrong...