It's not debate with you.I see nobody wants debate in this thread.
It should be changed to moaning about VAR thread.
The two footed aspect, whatever you were describing, is irrelevant.It's not debate with you.
I never said it was a 2 footed challenge but you decided, for what ever reason, that is what I'd said. You even showed a photograph to prove it wasn't a 2 footed challenge.
Other than the West Ham wanker, sorry wum, no I was right first time, I will debate but it has to be an honest one.
We still don't have access to any audio and we don't know what feeds they have in the VAR cabin, so we'll never know.This bit. There is no evidence of Sky influencing any decision.
The referee decided whether he made an error or not. He could have gone to the screen and not changed his mind, should he have thought he was still right.
The only thing to debate here is what a clear and obvious error is. That is subjective and why we still have these red card debates.
You're not on your own @BlueHammer85. Many people on here agree with a lot of the points you make. Many disagree too, but that's what debate is all about. If some people are unable to keep it civil, then that's their problem, and it's a mark against their character, not yours.For what it’s worth , having a debate over the pros and cons of VAR is nothing to do with what club anyone supports
If you really think my objective is to be at odds with Blues then why would I create some Music threads which have been enjoyed by many, run challenges for Blues during lockdown, donate to various posters charities over the years and personally helped a few Blues with addiction issues.
Your only issue is that I see some positives with VAR and don’t believe it’s all a conspiracy , for some reason that annoys you so much that I must be a WUM , a ‘fucktard’ and whatever childish insults you continue to throw at me.
If anyone tags me and wants a rational debate then I’ll respond, if not - I’m out of this thread and I’ll leave the likes of you to carry on shouting at the clouds over everything. Have a good one.
And that’s where your bar for VAR is.We still don't have access to any audio and we don't know what feeds they have in the VAR cabin, so we'll never know.
A clear error in this case would be Trippier making zero contact, but there is still the intent. The ref saw it and made a subjective call based on what he saw. It should not be overridden by another subjective decision.
This is a poor attitude. You are maligning someone in anticipation of what he might say. Why not at least allow him to voice his opinion, before bad-mouthing him?If that fucking spanner comes on gobbing off about VAR it will prove mine and many others point. He is here to Spam
2 feet off the ground above knee high and yet var told the ref not to give a red. Bent.
I thought that VAR was used to review all red cards regardless of whether there is a "clear and obvious" error? Like it reviews all goals and offsides.Debate what?
The Ref deemed it to be a Red Card in real-time. Someone in Stockley park didn't agree, likely influenced by the TV company (in this case Sky) for not wanting to ruin thegameproduct as a spectacle. The referee DID NOT MAKE A CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERROR, yet VAR was still allowed to intervene when we are all told categorically week-in-week-out that VAR will only intervene for clear and obvious errors.
It's bullshit if they aren't going to be consistent with its use. It SHOULD NOT depend what colour shirt a team is wearing.
You're almost right. A few people are open to debate, but they soon get hounded out if you disagree with their opinions.I see nobody wants debate in this thread.
It should be changed to moaning about VAR thread.