Berbaclass
Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Gonna get flamed but I don’t think it’s really controversial. The way football is these days you can’t touch anyone’s face.
You can if it’s in the build up to a goal.I'm more pissed about the fact rashford got wiped out previously and absolutely nothing happened.
You can't pick and choose which challenges to look at.
Then why bottle the 2nd yellow? You can't punch someone on the face and not get a yellow if that's what they're thinking.Gonna get flamed but I don’t think it’s really controversial. The way football is these days you can’t touch anyone’s face.
Scouse wum, can't say what he really is.As a WUM or actually?
then why was Rashford kicked through the ankle and elbowed in the chin and nothing given?Gonna get flamed but I don’t think it’s really controversial. The way football is these days you can’t touch anyone’s face.
This sums it up right here.Ref didn’t have the guts to stick by his original decision. Spurs players have played him like a fiddle all game.
That's my argument, Scott caresses his face due to the difference in height between them.What makes it even worse is Son tries to grab McTominay .
It’s an absolute train wreck of a decision.
Doesn’t get given if Son doesn’t go down like a sack of shit either.
Except the several other occasions in this very match where players did and no foul was given once.Gonna get flamed but I don’t think it’s really controversial. The way football is these days you can’t touch anyone’s face.
This. They're not taking that part into consideration.Son clearly fouls McTominay first, so that’s just terrible refereeing. It’s a foul from McTominay but only because Son fouls him first. And lying down for two minutes is just pathetic.
Wasn’t in the build up to a goal. VAR don’t intervene to just give random free kicks.then why was Rashford kicked through the ankle and elbowed in the chin and nothing given?
No, they aren't told it's wrong, just that it's something they might want look at. He could very easily (and sensibly) have looked at that and done nothing. Mind you, this call to view it again is also made my another inept ref, not an automated system.Because he was told he’d made the wrong decision. That’s when they’re sent to view it. The tech is a tv. A ref watching tv. Therefore there is something wrong with the ‘tech’.
it was in the penalty area. Are you even watching the game?Wasn’t in the build up to a goal. VAR don’t intervene to just give random free kicks.
Foul on rashford was outside the box therefore non-reviewableI'm more pissed about the fact rashford got wiped out previously and absolutely nothing happened.
You can't pick and choose which challenges to look at.
They only do that if they think they’re wrong.No, they aren't told it's wrong, just that it's something they might want look at. He could very easily (and sensibly) have looked at that and done nothing. Mind you, this call to view it again is also made my another inept ref, not an automated system.
It was outsideit was in the penalty area. Are you even watching the game?
Unless you're playing against Lindelof, then you can use shove a hand in his face and VAR will say "that's fine".Gonna get flamed but I don’t think it’s really controversial. The way football is these days you can’t touch anyone’s face.
I forgot that! Oh Christ yeah that’s ridiculous, how is there any consistency? Grab lindelof by the face? Fine!Unless you're playing against Lindelof, then you can use shove a hand in his face and VAR will say "that's fine".
Feck off. If we are going to set the bar there for "violent conduct" then we would have 2-3 red cards in every gameObvious decision. McT with a challenge that could be a yellow or even red if deemed intentional.
Hard to say on that. Chelsea had one chalked off against us last season for an offside in the build up. There was a significant amount of time between the offside and the goal though. VAR ruled the goal out.Yeah, but if we kept it for a minute and scored would it be disallowed? Where is the arbitrary line drawn?
Commentary said they initially looked at it for a red card. They didn't bother with Rashford's challenge at all.Wasn’t in the build up to a goal. VAR don’t intervene to just give random free kicks.
Outside the box.Commentary said they initially looked at it for a red card. They didn't bother with Rashford's challenge at all.
Thats not in the rules though... Contact with the face has to be above negligible force, think its hard to argue this was anything above negligible.Obvious decision. McT with a challenge that could be a yellow or even red if deemed intentional.
What's that got to do with it? If they look at it for a red card it doesn't matter where it is.Outside the box.
It wasn’t a red.What's that got to do with it? If they look at it for a red card it doesn't matter where it is.
It's not exactly that simple.The fact that it's being discussed this much and half time commentators can't agree shows it wasn't a clear and obvious error, which is what VAR is meant to be for.
It's so frustrating that we have the technology there and it's being used in such a piss poor way. No consistency and frequent deviations from what it's supposed to do
I was asking previously, I don't remember us getting a 50-50 or even a 60-40 VAR decision going our way after Klopp starting whining about us.It might sound RAWKish but we really have been fecked over by VAR this season.