I actually switched off BT sport after the game as it was pathetic to hear Jake Humphreys drone on and on about VAR instead of talking about the football. VAR brings out some seriously luddite mentalities.
I see the 'ABU' Media are back in full voice...
- Thread starter LawCharltonBest
- Start date
- Status
It means we're relevant again, enjoy it. Utd sells papers. Just revel in their tears.
The Penalty appeal could have been given or not given. Whatever the ref went with VAR would have gone with, it wasn't clear or obvious to overturn.
The offside was offside, however as posters rightly pointed out on reddit, it depends what reference frame you use. VAR should also show the frame being selected as the player (the passer) makes contact with the ball, that frame should be shown getting selected for the VAR offside investigation.
Even if you are a pixel or a little-toe offside, by definition you are offside.
The offside was offside, however as posters rightly pointed out on reddit, it depends what reference frame you use. VAR should also show the frame being selected as the player (the passer) makes contact with the ball, that frame should be shown getting selected for the VAR offside investigation.
Even if you are a pixel or a little-toe offside, by definition you are offside.
But the media don’t make a big deal when decisions don’t go our way.
The penalty wasn’t 100%, I didn’t think it was since he got the ball, it was hardly Fred vs City where their player didn’t get the ball, it didn’t get headlines in fact I’m pretty sure Dermott Gallagher on sky agreed with VAR, hopefully we will get the same benefit today.
As for the offside, I’m confused as to why you’d be miffed if that went against us? It’s the same for every club...the only one I found strange was city vs Liverpool because he looked off and the lines made him look on from the one angle, but from others he was off.
The majority of people on this forum are only fans because Manchester United are a famous club that gets talked about on TV. That coverage is necessarily going to be sometimes good and sometimes bad.
It seems churlish to complain about it, when the club's media footprint is the whole reason most posters are here in the first place.
It seems churlish to complain about it, when the club's media footprint is the whole reason most posters are here in the first place.
Last edited:
We cant see the frames that VAR uses, only what BT are capable of broadcasting.
I can't believe the furore having watched it all back.
1) the Zaha penalty shout isn't a penalty from what I can see. Lindelof touches the ball. Even if you wanted to frame it differently it's fine margins and hardly a blooper. I can see why it wasn't given by either the on field or off field officials.
2) as we have had all season the offside decision is offside. That's how the rules have been applied like it or lump it. Again don't see why the big deal now.
1) the Zaha penalty shout isn't a penalty from what I can see. Lindelof touches the ball. Even if you wanted to frame it differently it's fine margins and hardly a blooper. I can see why it wasn't given by either the on field or off field officials.
2) as we have had all season the offside decision is offside. That's how the rules have been applied like it or lump it. Again don't see why the big deal now.
Is there anything more pathetic than grown men using the phrase ‘ABU media’? How utterly boring.
I’ve watched lots of football coverage since the restart. The media have, by and large, been very complimentary of our football and just about every single television pundit has backed us to finish in the top four.
I’ve watched lots of football coverage since the restart. The media have, by and large, been very complimentary of our football and just about every single television pundit has backed us to finish in the top four.
Not just the media, football Twitter have been having near daily meltdowns and are dissecting and crying over every single close decision that goes our way as if we haven't been quite unlucky over the last few years when were shite and Banter FC 
Now that we're on the up again and they seem to be scared, the classic conspiracies from the Fergie era are coming back in force about the FA backing us.
Bruno's also become quite the boogeyman for them apparently after 7 goals and 8 assists in his last 12 PL games
I absolutely love it
, shows we're almost back if rival fanbases are getting rattled over every little thing United related.
The old mantra still rings true in 2020, hated, adored but never ignored
Now that we're on the up again and they seem to be scared, the classic conspiracies from the Fergie era are coming back in force about the FA backing us.
Bruno's also become quite the boogeyman for them apparently after 7 goals and 8 assists in his last 12 PL games
I absolutely love it
, shows we're almost back if rival fanbases are getting rattled over every little thing United related.The old mantra still rings true in 2020, hated, adored but never ignored
Imagine a defender clattering into an 18 year old;blatantly and aggressively. Straight red but the media gloss over it and focus on VAR. There you have their agenda.
I really don't give a toss about the media these days. If they're back to hating Utd and thinking we get the decisions then we must be winning..
I really don't give a toss about the media these days. If they're back to hating Utd and thinking we get the decisions then we must be winning..
He’s Mourinho’s man. He hates United now.
With the disallowed Palace goal, the technology in that case correctly enforced the rules. I thought it was harsh on Palace but only in the sense that it was a good move and they were a few centimetres off getting a well-deserved goal. We have a clear offside rule and it's illogical to blame referees for being "too accurate" in enforcing it. We don't give out goals to players whose shots almost crossed the line, so why should we give goals to players who were almost onside?
VAR has clear issues in the way it's used, but if people think that particular decision was unfair their issue is with the offside rule itself, not VAR.
VAR has clear issues in the way it's used, but if people think that particular decision was unfair their issue is with the offside rule itself, not VAR.
Come on, it's a stone wall penalty.
"But he touched the ball!" - yeah but he went through Zaha's ankle to touch it, went our way so I don't care but I fully expected it to be called.
As for the offside, a little bit offside is still offside... no conversation to be had on that.
"But he touched the ball!" - yeah but he went through Zaha's ankle to touch it, went our way so I don't care but I fully expected it to be called.
As for the offside, a little bit offside is still offside... no conversation to be had on that.
You can choose to ignore the media bias but it does have a real impact. Someone made the point on here a few years ago that referees know that any marginal decision given in Unitred's favour will receive enormous media scrutiny while decisions the other way are largely ignored. I think that pressure has to have subconscious impact on some referees, at the very least.
This is the crux of it.
If a Manchester United player, say Rashford at home against Bournemouth is offside, they’ll be called for it; it’s no longer subjective - anyone complaining about it really is a cretin.
As for the penalty, not one. cared so much about Greenwood nearly having his career ended so it’s rich they get so het up about this decision.
Before joining this forum I genuinely thought most people watched the games then turn off like I do.
I see they're starting to fear us with all these rubbishes.
We're back!
We're back!Who cares what the media /BT sport want to say.
They can say we're a bunch of talentless wankers for all I care.
It was a penalty, it was offside, we rode our luck, who cares.
They can say we're a bunch of talentless wankers for all I care.
It was a penalty, it was offside, we rode our luck, who cares.
Hated. Adored. But Never Ignored. Manchester United Football Club.
Whatever. This is just par for the course as United will always generate attention no matter what they do or not do.
Whatever. This is just par for the course as United will always generate attention no matter what they do or not do.
The current problem with offside isn't VAR. VAR is being used to consistently call the real problem: A harsh new official definition of the offside law.
BT's coverage wasn't biased against United.
Great. This is one of those indicators we're really on the way back.
Watched NBC who are far enough away from the petty tribalism of the UK broadcasters to have viewed it all pretty calmly. No pen and offside.
The UK media has always leeched off us and generated faux fury to stay relevant. It's a compliment of sorts and a definite sign that we're on the right path.
The UK media has always leeched off us and generated faux fury to stay relevant. It's a compliment of sorts and a definite sign that we're on the right path.
It never stopped, even at our worst times, the media tried to stir issues. Imagine Jose complaining about us being lucky, when his teams attack once or twice a game.
The truth about it is, they always root for the underdog. I'm not sure its even a United thing really, we just happen to be more successful and more headline grabbing than other top teams. For example, does anyone really care if Spurs lose games? Teams like Chelsea and City can win the league with noone even paying any attention to it. It's the reason why I still see Arsenal as a bigger team than Chelsea. They attract for more attention even when the situation is negative. Hazard left Chelsea, and noone even batted an eye. City'e heroes like Aguero, Silva and Yaya are always underrated because noone really cares about City. Even Chelsea's recent decline hasn't really attracted much media attention compared to United, Liverpool's ( prior) or Arsenal's.
Even Ian Wright didn't think it was a penalty that ought to be turned by VAR. If it's offside then it's offside. Mm or a foot?
You just have to watch our recent games and look at our recent goals to understand why we might be getting more penalties. Fast, athletic, agile forwards with quick feet and direct running at players.
What's new about the offside rule? It's just applied consistently.
It's funny how opposition fans love to cite VAR and bias towards us, but when you look at the statistics, although we've benefitted the most from VAR (+8 net decisions positive), Brighton are second to us with +7 net decisions positive. So, if they're going to make a point about VAR bias for us, then they should be making the same for Brighton too. Obviously the argument falls apart.
Personally I feel these threads are super insecure, and bordering on RAWK parodies...
Agreed
Worrying about a thread on Redcafe coming across as RAWKish seems very insecure.
Even more so.
Pundit pre winning run: This is why we talk about United so much, not because we criticizing for fun, a club of that size should be challenging for titles, winning, and we won't have this conversation.
Pundit during winning run:*Insert moments that could favor united to win the game
Pundit during winning run:*Insert moments that could favor united to win the game
I don't get the noise about the penalty tbh. It's the one thing VAR got right IMHO.
In real time I thought it maybe a penalty but seeing it in slow mo for VAR it was obvious Zaha had lost the ball and the reason Lindelof was able to get the ball first was as half the ball was behind zaha, between his legs. Lindelofs leg hit him after it hit the ball.
Watch it again in slow motion and you'll see what I mean.
The goal one was right by the letter of the current law but it's a silly law if it's that close.
In real time I thought it maybe a penalty but seeing it in slow mo for VAR it was obvious Zaha had lost the ball and the reason Lindelof was able to get the ball first was as half the ball was behind zaha, between his legs. Lindelofs leg hit him after it hit the ball.
Watch it again in slow motion and you'll see what I mean.
The goal one was right by the letter of the current law but it's a silly law if it's that close.
Was just listening to the Transfer window podcast, they looked at the stats we had most penalties won this season (btw City is only 3 behind), and without reviewing what those actual decisions were, they went on to say Chelsea and Leicester will be hard done to miss on CL due to Man Utd getting these favors from the ref and almost actually said we might be bribing the FA/refs.
We did get help from VAR. The assistant didn't call Ayew offside, VAR did and therefor the decision got changed.
Classic RAWK thread if you ask me....Sky and BT have been nothing but complimentary about us since lockdown. It’s a headline to create clicks . Southampton lucky to get away with red card doesn’t create as much excitement does it.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This made me chuckle, what the feck does half of this even mean ?
Something I really don’t understand is how noone are talking about the fact that Southampton should’ve had three red cards. After the game when I saw no discussion of it I thought I had got it wrong, but I don’t think I have.
1. The Romeu foul.
2. Stephens elbow straight in Martials head, he was already on a yellow and should’ve had another.
3. When Bruno was kicked and the ball wasn’t anywhere near, it was clearly just out of pure frustration because the Southampton player had just lost the ball. Can’t remember who it was, but if Soyuncu got a red for kicking a player out of anger then this should be red as well.
1. The Romeu foul.
2. Stephens elbow straight in Martials head, he was already on a yellow and should’ve had another.
3. When Bruno was kicked and the ball wasn’t anywhere near, it was clearly just out of pure frustration because the Southampton player had just lost the ball. Can’t remember who it was, but if Soyuncu got a red for kicking a player out of anger then this should be red as well.
I'd like a live shot of Rio to be in one corner of the screen all game
- Status