The mancityfans.net football forum

BlueinBosnia wrote:

ayrshireblue wrote:Conceding the goal was definitely the City defence's fault. But VAR is in place to look at reasons why the goal shouldn't stand and it SHOULD NOT stand according to Law 16 which clearly states -
"Law 16 - The goal kick

The ball is in play once the kick is taken; it can be played before leaving the penalty area
Opponents must remain outside the penalty area until the ball is kicked"

VAR should have looked at the goal and decided that there was an offence caused by Pukki not being out the area when the ball became active. They didn't do this and I'm asking why?

It's all down to interpretation of the part in bold. I'd interpret 'remain' in this context to mean 'not re-enter once they have left', i.e. if a player is trying to leave the area when the kick is taken, they're not breaking the rule, as it is down to the goalkeeper (if they so wish) to give the player time to leave the area before they take the kick. Otherwise, it could be argued that the goalkeeper is playing contrary to the laws of the game by not allowing sufficient time for a player to leave the area.

brexit means brexit!

BlueinBosnia wrote:

ayrshireblue wrote:Conceding the goal was definitely the City defence's fault. But VAR is in place to look at reasons why the goal shouldn't stand and it SHOULD NOT stand according to Law 16 which clearly states -
"Law 16 - The goal kick

The ball is in play once the kick is taken; it can be played before leaving the penalty area
Opponents must remain outside the penalty area until the ball is kicked"

VAR should have looked at the goal and decided that there was an offence caused by Pukki not being out the area when the ball became active. They didn't do this and I'm asking why?

It's all down to interpretation of the part in bold. I'd interpret 'remain' in this context to mean 'not re-enter once they have left', i.e. if a player is trying to leave the area when the kick is taken, they're not breaking the rule, as it is down to the goalkeeper (if they so wish) to give the player time to leave the area before they take the kick. Otherwise, it could be argued that the goalkeeper is playing contrary to the laws of the game by not allowing sufficient time for a player to leave the area.

That's a beauty of a post. Cheers

Some shocking decisions yesterday. The levels of inconsistency are dreadful. Goals given when in previous weeks they were chalked off for handball. Goals disallowed for the merest infringements when in other games those same infringements aren’t given.

I know it’s a work in progress and I dare say it might improve. The implementation and its communication certainly needs to improve. Even the broadcasters at the Spurs game didn’t know what had happened yesterday.

I was fearful and cynical about the introduction of VAR primarily because it’s still down to the decision of a human and can thus be manipulated to an advantage. This season and the decisions so far VAR has made only reinforces my opinion

Turned into an absolute farce and, to be honest, has turned into something that we all feared, used to control results.

Pitchside monitors are needed.

I know it slows things up but it's obvious the VAR refs are reluctant to overrule the ref, let the refs see the replays.

nottsblue wrote:Some shocking decisions yesterday. The levels of inconsistency are dreadful. Goals given when in previous weeks they were chalked off for handball. Goals disallowed for the merest infringements when in other games those same infringements aren’t given.

I know it’s a work in progress and I dare say it might improve. The implementation and its communication certainly needs to improve. Even the broadcasters at the Spurs game didn’t know what had happened yesterday.

I was fearful and cynical about the introduction of VAR primarily because it’s still down to the decision of a human and can thus be manipulated to an advantage. This season and the decisions so far VAR has made only reinforces my opinion

You say it is a work in progress. It isn't , it is the finished thing. and the management of it is absolutely disgraceful and not even Amateur. The PL have had years perfecting VAR and we now see why.

It is simply inexcusable . For example, imagine some guy in a Bookies , during the waiting process for the Spuds goal placed a bet that VAR would rule it out and pops "NO GOAL" and the bookie pays out straight away only to find a minute or so later , it is a goal !

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:Pitchside monitors are needed.

I know it slows things up but it's obvious the VAR refs are reluctant to overrule the ref, let the refs see the replays.

They're already there, just PiGMOL have ordered them not to be used.

it’s just amplifying how fucking shit our officials are. it’s embarrassing and needs to be addressed.

Nigels Tackle wrote:it’s just amplifying how fucking shit our officials are. it’s embarrassing and needs to be addressed.

Shit or Bent ? its arguable on both points but I tend to sway to the latter.

The one thing I can say about VaR today is that at least it was consistent. Consistently shit yes. But had the dippers got any of those calls I’d have been fuming.

Anybody got a candle that Klopp can borrow?

Beefymcfc wrote:Anybody got a candle that Klopp can borrow?

The weird cunt needs some of those nashers extracting with pliers

City64 wrote:

Beefymcfc wrote:Anybody got a candle that Klopp can borrow?

The weird cunt needs some of those nashers extracting with pliers

That's how they got them in!

Just watched the highlights from the rags-dipper game. I can understand why Liverpool fans would feel hard done by, but looking at how VAR has been employed so far this season they don't have anything to complain about.

Did Lindelöf foul Origi? Yes, but it was on the other end of the pitch. VAR is not supposed vto be used for regular freekicks being given or not. Otherwise were left the question on how far back we should go to check possible infringements.

As for Mane's goal, that's ball about the bonkers new handball rule, which also saw Jesus's goal against Spurs being ruled out after Laport's handball.

mr_nool wrote:Just watched the highlights from the rags-dipper game. I can understand why Liverpool fans would feel hard done by, but looking at how VAR has been employed so far this season they don't have anything to complain about.

Did Lindelöf foul Origi? Yes, but it was on the other end of the pitch. VAR is not supposed vto be used for regular freekicks being given or not. Otherwise were left the question on how far back we should go to check possible infringements.

As for Mane's goal, that's ball about the bonkers new handball rule, which also saw Jesus's goal against Spurs being ruled out after Laport's handball.

On your second para, once the VAR goes back and looks at the Origi foul the correct decision has to be given, foul, no goal. The issue for me is should the VAR even be going back to look at it?

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

mr_nool wrote:Just watched the highlights from the rags-dipper game. I can understand why Liverpool fans would feel hard done by, but looking at how VAR has been employed so far this season they don't have anything to complain about.

Did Lindelöf foul Origi? Yes, but it was on the other end of the pitch. VAR is not supposed vto be used for regular freekicks being given or not. Otherwise were left the question on how far back we should go to check possible infringements.

As for Mane's goal, that's ball about the bonkers new handball rule, which also saw Jesus's goal against Spurs being ruled out after Laport's handball.

On your second para, once the VAR goes back and looks at the Origi foul the correct decision has to be given, foul, no goal. The issue for me is should the VAR even be going back to look at it?

Exactly my point. It's not something VAR should look at. I think it's been stated that VAR should only be used for offside, penalties, handballs in the penalty area/in connection to goals, possible red cards, and gross errors, like sending off the wrong player.

Listening to 5 Live on my drive back to the north east from the match and a text came in declaring that VAR stood for "Validating Abysmal Refereeing". Couldn't agree more!

Also, our second goal was constantly mentioned along with Brighton's penalty as "VAR not working" - strangely no mention of that cunt Grealish's grabbing of David's leg to pull him back (yellow card offence) whilst already on a yellow despite VAR review. Was also pissed off that his 2nd half foul stopping our quick break, which was almost identical to Fern's, went unpunished by the ref (except for the free kick) while he couldn't wait to give Fern a 2nd yellow. He was probably the worst ref we've had this season - and that's some achievement!!

Bluemoon4610 wrote:Listening to 5 Live on my drive back to the north east from the match and a text came in declaring that VAR stood for "Validating Abysmal Refereeing". Couldn't agree more!

Also, our second goal was constantly mentioned along with Brighton's penalty as "VAR not working" - strangely no mention of that cunt Grealish's grabbing of David's leg to pull him back (yellow card offence) whilst already on a yellow despite VAR review. Was also pissed off that his 2nd half foul stopping our quick break, which was almost identical to Fern's, went unpunished by the ref (except for the free kick) while he couldn't wait to give Fern a 2nd yellow. He was probably the worst ref we've had this season - and that's some achievement!!

Good post he was shocking pal . VAR ruined the first half , one decision took an absolute age , there were four VAR referals in total in the first half . One fucking minute added on first half just shows how fucking pathetically shite the ref and all the officials were .

That family friendly made for tv chant was hard to not notice lol

PrezIke wrote:That family friendly made for tv chant was hard to not notice lol

Both sets of fans singing the same song. A contender for the new national anthem?