halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,454
Which isn’t remotely the fault of VAR which did its bloody job.
Without VAR, that’s not a penalty and would be being talked about at length in the agenda or bad refereeing thread.
Only a select number of City fans could use VAR doing its job as a reason denigrate VAR.
The point being argued, I think, was that the availability of VAR means referees are less likely to give a decision if they know VAR will cover for them. So it's not a case of the penalty in question not being given without VAR, rather a case of the penalty being given on first sight without a safety net. The ref was looking right at it but, of course, we will never know unless we hear the comms.