Ok cool. But what is going to change to prevent wrong calls in the future?
I just don’t really get the consistency here.
I personally have no issue with VAR not being able to rule that the ball went out of play. I think Gabriel was fouled in the build-up and I still don’t see how they didn’t have the correct footage for the offside, but that’s another matter entirely.
My point is that if there wasn’t enough evidence to rule out whether or not Willock had run the ball out for them to act, then why was Rashford keeping the ball in play against Brighton not given the same advantage? Surely, they had the same level of evidence for that, no?
I’m in awe people are still crying about this. The Liverpool decision last night was worse and the man United decision was about on par and everyone has moved on.
For me, I think it’s because people can’t even admit that Arsenal got fucked over that match. There are still people who think the goal was fair.
Then there’s stories of PGMOL making sure pundits cover the referees
Apparently there is not enough evidence in that picture
Funny that. They decide that the match defining call was correct but happy to hold their hands up to the other two.
It was a foul for the goal. It’s fucking simple. Cowards.
Still won’t stop Arsenal supporters from moaning about it.
I mean they voted that Havertz tackle was a red 5-0 and that Bruno’s was a red 3-2… their findings are hard to deem credible.
That picture of the Havertz tackle is also weird, given he only touched him with the left leg. Don’t know why that should be a clear red tbh, even if he had some speed
This sounds pedantic but they weren’t voting on whether it was a red or not, they were voting on whether the VAR intervention was correct. And yes, for the record I think it makes very little difference here and I’m surprised it wasn’t unanimously agreed as wrong. But I can only assume they disagreed on the basis of whether its ‘clear and obvious red’ as opposed to red card at all.
Note that the panel only voted 3-2 in favour of saying Bruno’s intentional forearm to the head of Jorginho should have been reviewed and been a red card.
The rules are very clear that striking someone intentionally in the head is violent conduct and a red so there is no excuse for getting this wrong. But why might that be the case?
Well this independent panel includes 3 ex players and or coaches. Why are they deemed competent to know the rules and give valid opinions? As we know from punditry players often have shit takes because when they played football they could two foot people from behind or elbow people in the face as they jump up for headers.
I would love to see what evidence they had to disallow the goal that Rashford apparently let the ball go out of play for. Different rules for different clubs apparently.
Remember when they were boasting that VAR will result in 98.8% of decisions being correct lol
The fact that only 3-2 of them said Bruno should have been sent off is super fishy.
I don’t trust how independent this ‘independent’ panel is.
Day 6 of this very tiring discourse can we just move on please