1 hour ago, Backbiter said:

No, it was the Manchester duo of Taylor and Kavanagh that conspired to ignore the Maguire kick in the nuts.

sorry my bad

 

a week ago the same c**t who calls himself a reff gives a pen for this sh*t - 0:20 sec

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yikb6fEDs2I

1 hour ago, mojo said:

sorry my bad

 

a week ago the same c**t who calls himself a reff gives a pen for this sh*t - 0:20 sec

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yikb6fEDs2I

Obviously told by Mike Riley that was far too soft a challenge by Lamptey to be awarded a pen, and that if there's any repeat this weekend that would harm his beloved Manure, he'd be demoted to League 2.

Edited October 25, 20205 yr by Backbiter

I just saw it again and cannot think of a single reason why VAR didn't give it, not a single one other than they are corrupt w**kers. 

22 hours ago, dkw said:

I just saw it again and cannot think of a single reason why VAR didn't give it, not a single one other than they are corrupt w**kers. 

Every dermot Gallagher on sky, who normally backs refs and VAR to the hilt, said he could not understand how VAR could see that and should need just one single replay to see it was a clear pen.

Having VAR and review in football is a great idea and should be implemented, but with that being said, the way they are using - or not using - it is completely ridiculous. At least the match official is now going and looking at the damn monitor instead of not looking at the incident his self and just trusting the VAR official to make the right call.

They said that VAR looked at the OBVIOUS penalty against Maguire and they determined it wasn't a penalty... I honestly don't understand how these people got to the position they are in to make decisions regarding fouls. Do they honestly know the rules of football? Do they know that you are not supposed to wrap your arms around a players shoulders so that that player cannot make an attempt on the ball?

It just baffles me to the point to where it isn't even baffling anymore. You just shake your head and mutter to yourself shaking your head, "Well, that isn't surprising."

The speed in which they decided it wasn't a pen was suspicious too, barely even bothered looking at it.

We gave up the instant euphoria from scoring goals for this piece of crap.

 

14 hours ago, dkw said:

The speed in which they decided it wasn't a pen was suspicious too, barely even bothered looking at it.

especially the amount of time they then replayed the one on Rashford desperately trying to find a way of giving it 

It's a clear bias and cheating. How can man utd get so many penalties, many of which are very debatable and dodgy, but when we go to old Trafford and its against them, its a screw job. We all saw what happened with Maguire last time around, and then disallowing Zouma's goal as well. The thing that really showed them up to be corrupt was how the var check basically took place in a split second for the headlock, but then they overly replayed the one on Rashford. You had Gary Neville dismissing the Maguire one and saying he thought Rashford's could be given. Straight after the break they only mentioned the one on Rashford, and it was only after Evra And Jimmy Floyd put them in their place and said it wasent a penalty but the Maguire one was clear and obvious, that the narrative changed. Then all of a sudden sky kept mentioning how wasen't the one for us given.

This is unfortunately what we have to deal with constantly. There are obvious errors going against us, really impacting results. However, if it goes against Man Utd or Liverpool, theres a massive deal made about it by the clubs themselves and the media. I honestly think if it wasen't Maguire involved, this incident would of been completely swept under the rug. 

Edited October 27, 20205 yr by Oli
spelling

11 minutes ago, Oli said:

You had Gary Neville dismissing the Maguire

Well not quite, he said that Maguire "got away with one"

Watch it again, he made multiple excuses to suggest it wasen't a penalty

10 minutes ago, Oli said:

Watch it again, he made multiple excuses to suggest it wasen't a penalty

i cant watch it again, but check out the match thread we had this discussion and he said Maguire got away with one, which is about as close as he gets to saying it would of been a penalty.

On 24/10/2020 at 20:44, Sindre said:

There is clear United-bias from VAR. There is a reason they get away with the the stuff they do and the amount of penalties they get.

Just against us Maguire have gotten away with kicking Batshuayi in the nuts and chokeslamming Azpilicueta. Both with VAR and both nothing given. 

VAR have a duty, as do the premier League to have a strong challenging United team, even with a sh*t team they have at present, and total clown of a manager, the armchair fans of United from across the world, from Asia to South America to Australia have to be kept interested, money talks.

Sensible comments on VAR from Keith Hackett:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/nov/11/keith-hackett-referees-have-lost-the-plot-on-handball-premier-league-var

Anyone familiar with my post history on this forum will know that I have been anti-VAR from the very beginning. Growing up in Australia I have been surrounded by sports that embrace video refeering (cricket, rugby and AFL) who have all had many, many video referee controveries over the decades. The same arguments, concerns and outrage plays out across the various sports with the same tired allegations of corruption, unfairness, bias and incompetency. Yet these are the sorts of debates that VAR was supposed to 'solve'.

There is a mathematical problem with any video review system known as the problem of multiple comparisons. Simply put, the more comparison points you have in a system, the more likely any given one of these will be in error.  This is a fundamental, unavoidable problem in statistics and the only solution is to minimise the overall error rate by reducing the error rate of the individual, first-level comparisons. In the context of VAR, this means it is mathematically impossible to improve the accuracy of VAR without improving the accuracy of the field referees first.

Assistive technology works really where there is an outcome with minimal room for discretion (eg Goal Line technology, Hawkeye in Tennis or runouts in cricket) but the moment any sort of discretion is required, it eventually falls apart (eg VAR, DRS in cricket)

To that extent, you have to wonder what the point of VAR is - in other sports, it is merely a vehicle to sell additional sponsorship time.

Edited November 12, 20205 yr by SydneyChelsea

10 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Anyone familiar with my post history on this forum will know that I have been anti-VAR from the very beginning. Growing up in Australia I have been surrounded by sports that embrace video refeering (cricket, rugby and AFL) who have all had many, many video referee controveries over the decades. The same arguments, concerns and outrage plays out across the various sports with the same tired allegations of corruption, unfairness, bias and incompetency. Yet these are the sorts of debates that VAR was supposed to 'solve'.

There is a mathematical problem with any video review system known as the problem of multiple comparisons. Simply put, the more comparison points you have in a system, the more likely any given one of these will be in error.  This is a fundamental, unavoidable problem in statistics and the only solution is to minimise the overall error rate by reducing the error rate of the individual, first-level comparisons. In the context of VAR, this means it is mathematically impossible to improve the accuracy of VAR without improving the accuracy of the field referees first.

Assistive technology works really where there is an outcome with minimal room for discretion (eg Goal Line technology, Hawkeye in Tennis or runouts in cricket) but the moment any sort of discretion is required, it eventually falls apart (eg VAR, DRS in cricket)

To that extent, you have to wonder what the point of VAR is - in other sports, it is merely a vehicle to sell additional sponsorship time.

I personally believe DRS works incredibly well in Cricket especially with Umpires decision being given priority alongside the captain having the ability to challenge a questionable call.

I think football should adopt a similar approach where the Captain/Manager has the ability to challenge a decision with teams having 1 Challenge per match (Challenges being lost after an unsuccessful challenge). I think this method eradicates a lot of the controversy around VAR and helps with the flow of the game, teams will not challenge 50/50 decisions and will most likely preserve them for obvious errors & if a ref makes an error and they've wasted a call and cannot challenge then it falls on the team and not the officials.

I think more importantly it will hugely limit the amount of time spent reviewing every single minor misdemeanor, for example I cannot see Man U wasting a review on that challenge on Rashford against us in the box however we may have asked for the ref to check the Maguires duel with Azpi which may have got the scrutiny it required.

14 hours ago, Imran_CFC said:

I personally believe DRS works incredibly well in Cricket especially with Umpires decision being given priority alongside the captain having the ability to challenge a questionable call.

I think football should adopt a similar approach where the Captain/Manager has the ability to challenge a decision with teams having 1 Challenge per match (Challenges being lost after an unsuccessful challenge). I think this method eradicates a lot of the controversy around VAR and helps with the flow of the game, teams will not challenge 50/50 decisions and will most likely preserve them for obvious errors & if a ref makes an error and they've wasted a call and cannot challenge then it falls on the team and not the officials.

I think more importantly it will hugely limit the amount of time spent reviewing every single minor misdemeanor, for example I cannot see Man U wasting a review on that challenge on Rashford against us in the box however we may have asked for the ref to check the Maguires duel with Azpi which may have got the scrutiny it required.

DRS for the most part has helped in some areas and been controversial in others. It is a mixed bag, same as any assistive technology. There has been plenty of DRS controversy with the same issues raised as VAR in the last 18 months, let alone the last 5-6 years.

I too prefer the 'challenge' approach but it would be difficult to implement practically in football, given that a Captain can be any player in any position on the pitch and therefore can't observe the game fully. 

But, it doesn't fully eradicate controversy. It never will until VAR is infallible - and as long as humans make decisions, there will always be a margin of error as described above.

To me the central issue becomes the fact that no one agrees on the true purpose of VAR and everyone has different expectations that often change through the course of time. The moment people expect VAR to resolve controversy is the moment it becomes pointless because it can never achieve that, and if that's the case we just need to go back to accepting the referee's decision.

 

 

 

 

 

With all the anti VAR articles surfacing at the moment, especially in Liverpool's defence, it makes you wonder why there wasn't a similar inquest last season... 

Maybe I'm misremembering, but I don't remember VAR getting the same attention as last year and it hasn't really changed. If anything, it's improved from last year. I don't remember Klopp and Henderson saying they wanted VAR gone when it was working in their favour. 

The below article helpfully illustrates who benefitted most from VAR last season. 

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/english-premier-league/story/3929823/how-var-decisions-have-affected-every-premier-league-club

I find the blinkered journalism annoying, looking at such a narrow time frame to judge VAR when they pull out their stats, disregarding the more complete picture of the full season that preceded this one.

4 hours ago, Shweaves said:

With all the anti VAR articles surfacing at the moment, especially in Liverpool's defence, it makes you wonder why there wasn't a similar inquest last season... 

Maybe I'm misremembering, but I don't remember VAR getting the same attention as last year and it hasn't really changed. If anything, it's improved from last year. I don't remember Klopp and Henderson saying they wanted VAR gone when it was working in their favour. 

The below article helpfully illustrates who benefitted most from VAR last season. 

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/english-premier-league/story/3929823/how-var-decisions-have-affected-every-premier-league-club

I find the blinkered journalism annoying, looking at such a narrow time frame to judge VAR when they pull out their stats, disregarding the more complete picture of the full season that preceded this one.

Useful as those tables are, they are incomplete. They are lacking a section on when VAR did NOT intervene when it should have. Off the top of my head, the Maguire kick in the nuts was a red card not given; the Lo Celso stamp was another; the trip on Azpi at Norwich that should have been a pen another; that scandalous penalty given at Villa when Fernandes jumped into the defender was another; and there was the notoriousTAA handball against Man City was a penalty not given and led directly to a goal at the other end. These non-interventions are just as relevant and need to be totted up as well. They would immediately show our VAR score as minus 5 and ManU's and Liverpool's would also increase in their favour.

Quote

Game: Chelsea (A; Feb. 17)
Incident: Kurt Zouma goal disallowed for foul on Brandon Williams by Cesar Azpilicueta, 55th minute - FOR
Incident: Olivier Giroud goal disallowed for offside, 77th minute - FOR

The above mentions the two goals that were ruled out, but fails to mention not only the Maguire incident but also the shove on Azpi that preceded the supposed foul that led to Zouma's goal being disallowed.  That is just ONE game where VAR massively benefitted Man U and hugely disadvantaged us.

We actually had a third goal disallowed that night, a tap in in the second half after De Gea had parried a shot. The ref (Taylor, who else?) blew for one of those accidental handballs (by Bats, I think) just before the shot that was parried. The rule is that such handballs are penalised if they lead directly to a goal, otherwise they are considered unintentional and play goes on. That one led to a shot that was saved, not to a goal, so Taylor was wrong to penalise it. It didn't go to VAR but if he hadn't blown prematurely (before the parried shot was put in the net) it would have done. So that was a Taylor mistake rather than a VAR error. At least the online social media meltdown after the game ensured that the ref and VAR official (Kavanagh) will never ref us ever again (bitter sarcasm font required).

There are no doubt loads more which would show the real scandal of how the VAR officials misused the technology last season.

Edited December 4, 20205 yr by Backbiter

After the VAR shenanigans of the last week, I just checked the latest tally of how VAR has affected clubs so far this season. 

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/english-premier-league/story/4182135/how-var-decisions-affected-every-premier-league-club-in-2020-21

We are in third place for being most helped by VAR.

But look a bit closer and you see (as I posted back in December) the tally is very misleading. Just last week against Arsenal we had three penalty claims - the handball and two trips on Havertz - but because VAR did NOT step in and lead to a change in decision, those do not count. The incidents are not mentioned as going against us, even though they clearly did.

Far as those in the English game are concerned I will sum it up simply with:

Refs - they are sh*t at their job, corrupt and on the take and play favorites.

VAR - their use of it is sh*t, they are corrupt and on the take and play favorites.

PMGOL - they are sh*t at their job, corrupt and on the take and play favorites.

A theme really.

Street party time:

https://twitter.com/search?q="Mike Dean"&src=trend_click&vertical=trends

52 minutes ago, Backbiter said:

Street party time:

https://twitter.com/search?q="Mike Dean"&src=trend_click&vertical=trends

I recall, was it last season, that Tottenham or maybe Liverpool (shocking) got a bad VAR decision, and the powers that be did a big apology about it, stating that they made a mistake and VAR should have overturned the decision on the field.

Now, given the 'Rom elbow offsides' call that should never have been called that way by VAR, since there have been plenty of other calls with a player's arm being offsides but the rest of him being onsides, and so an offsides call would not be proper, has a Chelsea official asked the VAR folks to justify their horrible decision in the Carabao Cup final or otherwise admit that they made a mistake?

Gets worse and worse...did you see liverpools goal against forest. They drew the lines away from his arm..jota was clearly offside in one angle and i dont know how the flipped it to find one where he was still offisde but manipulated the lines. Its shocking because the same teams keep benefitting.

But what we shouldn't have been made to accept is that Carabao cup robbery. We also got robbed in two FA Cup finals against Arsenal and that handball goal against Leicester last year. Its got to the point where we would be the most successful team in all these competitions if we didnt continually keep getting screwed over.