The official, though undoubtedly misunderstood or derided, 24/25 VAR thread

Log in to stop seeing adverts
This page may contain links to companies such as eBay and Amazon. As an affiliate of these sites I may earn commission if you click the link and make a purchase

That’s a 2 point deduction sorted. Only about 8 more to go.

Honestly, **** the Premier League.
 
I'm not having conspiracy theories about us and the PL.

If VAR has demonstrated anything over the last few years, it is that they don't have the first idea what they're doing.

It's beyond credibility that there is a concerted effort to pick on us.

It's incompetence, plain and simple.
 
I'm not having conspiracy theories about us and the PL.

If VAR has demonstrated anything over the last few years, it is that they don't have the first idea what they're doing.

It's beyond credibility that there is a concerted effort to pick on us.

It's incompetence, plain and simple.
I agree. Listening to fans of various teams, you'd think the whole league was against every team. I don't think referees are biased/corrupt etc, I think they're just capable of making shit decisions.
 
Selhurst park is the worse ground for camera angles, apparently.

If this fact is well known, then the decision should have been made beforehand, that if evidence was not conclusive to over turn a ref’s or ref’s assistant decision, then go with their call.

There is no way, you can say there was conclusive evidence to over turn the flagged offside decision.
 
I BN is correct in the post match thread that this was the image they used (albeit cropped here) to determine the call, there is no way Mateta was onside.

Onside3.jpg
 
To believe that the people running football are engaged in a conspiracy against your club is to believe that the people running football are capable of planning and delivering on an objective, and doing so with the upmost secrecy.
 
That's the only image I've seen that makes him look like he might be onside. Justin's toenail could be playing him on.
For me, it’s more that I can’t see how they can accurately pinpoint the location of the various body parts, given the angle they’re using.
 
For me, it’s more that I can’t see how they can accurately pinpoint the location of the various body parts, given the angle they’re using.
Yep. No way they can say anything for certain from that picture. Got to go with the original decision, the lino was in a much better position to see it than the camera.
 
That's the only image I've seen that makes him look like he might be onside. Justin's toenail could be playing him on.
I drew a line on top of the pecked one that is shown on the original photo coming from JJ's foot, I then transposed the line to Mateta. Offside easily, knee, head or hand.
 
Shite decision. VAR was always sold as intervening when there was a ‘Clear and Obvious Error’. So the difference may be millimetres and within error margins.
So it is not a clear and obvious error.
 
They've never said that for offsides. It either is or it isn't. Unless it's about whether someone is interfering with play or not.
That’s the problem, though, in this instance. It doesn’t look like they can draw a line that accurately demonstrates whether it is or isn’t.
 
Why did they take Mateta’s position from his knee?
Looks like his head is further forward,
Most people run with their head further forward, not like Forrest Gump!
 
Log in to stop seeing adverts

P Pld Pts
1Liverpool1742
2Chelsea1835
3Nottm F1834
4Arsenal1733
5Newcastle1829
6Bournemouth1829
7Manchester C  1828
8Fulham1828
9Aston Villa1828
10Brighton1725
11Tottenham 1823
12Brentford1723
13West Ham1823
14Manchester U1822
15Everton1717
16Palace1817
17Wolves1815
18Leicester1814
19Ipswich1712
20Southampton186

Latest posts

Back
Top