The Official Manchester City Premiership Champions Thread
Discussion
ChocolateFrog said:
The elephant in the room being that VAR got all the decisions right last night, it just didn't go City's way.
If they are going to use it, they need to engage the fans at home and at the game.Last night for the decisions they showed the refs race on the TV so you couldn't see the replays. They didn't show a replay of the aguero episode until well after the game had finished as I watched for a bit and instill haven't seen it.
I disagree fundamentally with VAR but if they are going to have it we need to at least be able to see the replays
Rugby does it better IMO. the ref is miked up and you can hear what he's asking the TMO to adjudicate on. The replays are shown and an off-pitch official advises the ref whether he can award the try / whether there was serious foul play or whatever.
Not sure that you could mike up the ref in football matches unless you want to broadcast the players calling him a
for 90 minutes, mind.
Not sure that you could mike up the ref in football matches unless you want to broadcast the players calling him a
for 90 minutes, mind.ORD said:
Football is for watching. It's not a war or an election. I don't care that some decisions are wrong. I don't want to sit there waiting while some idiots look at a screen to tell me whether or not a goal will stand!
I agree, but sadly, due to the ridiculous pressure everyone in the game seems to be under (caused by money, to a huge extent), it has been brought in. Imagine if the Championship play-off final (football's richest game, as Sky are forever reminding us), was decided by a goal that was six inches offside. The twenty-first century being what it is, I can see the ref and the FA being taken to court by the losing side ...Nowadays, players go off their rocker if a throw-in goes against them on the half-way line which is just bad, but players, fans, clubs and the FA should have stamped all this out years ago, but never did, and this is where we are ...
ORD said:
Football is for watching. It's not a war or an election. I don't care that some decisions are wrong. I don't want to sit there waiting while some idiots look at a screen to tell me whether or not a goal will stand!
Whether an illegal goal is what you mean. It’s not some romantic notion being dumped out of a competition because the game is stuck in 1950 its daft. BTW, Pep was so cool about it. Lots of respect for him this morning.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 18th April 09:29
robsco said:
The decision last night was marginal. It is ludicrous to suggest that the referee should be able to make that decision and be correct 100% of the time, when he (previously) didn’t have the benefit of 15 replays to determine whether the call was correct or not. The truth is simple - Aguero was offside, the goal shouldn’t have stood. Without VAR last night, the wrong team would have progressed. Someone earlier on here even claimed that as City had been the better team throughout, they wouldn’t have resented them the winning goal even through a wrong call... bizarre!
To those saying that VAR takes the drama out of the game... last night proves if anything it can be quite the opposite. ORD I believe is a Utd fan? I imagine he wasn’t hammering VAR when Utd were given a last minute penalty through the same means at PSG.
I was over the moon with the decision, but it does not change the fact that my overall view of VAR, having seen it in quite a few games now, is that it makes football a worse spectacle.To those saying that VAR takes the drama out of the game... last night proves if anything it can be quite the opposite. ORD I believe is a Utd fan? I imagine he wasn’t hammering VAR when Utd were given a last minute penalty through the same means at PSG.
As for the suggestion above that a goal was "illegal", that's the kind of hysteria that I just do not understand. If the referee allows a goal to stand, it is legal. The ref decides what is a good goal. He may be wrong. But I really don't care.
ORD said:
I was over the moon with the decision, but it does not change the fact that my overall view of VAR, having seen it in quite a few games now, is that it makes football a worse spectacle.
As for the suggestion above that a goal was "illegal", that's the kind of hysteria that I just do not understand. If the referee allows a goal to stand, it is legal. The ref decides what is a good goal. He may be wrong. But I really don't care.
You might not, but the money men will. Football has this strange way of making normally sane people act in a crazy way - witness some daft petition last year to get the Champs League final replayed because Salah was fouled, assaulted, maimed, nearly killed by Ramos ... okay obviously not going to happen but you can sure that if things happened on a football field that were 'wrong' and cost people money - legal things will be looked at.As for the suggestion above that a goal was "illegal", that's the kind of hysteria that I just do not understand. If the referee allows a goal to stand, it is legal. The ref decides what is a good goal. He may be wrong. But I really don't care.
smn159 said:
Rugby does it better IMO. the ref is miked up and you can hear what he's asking the TMO to adjudicate on. The replays are shown and an off-pitch official advises the ref whether he can award the try / whether there was serious foul play or whatever.
Not sure that you could mike up the ref in football matches unless you want to broadcast the players calling him a for 90 minutes, mind.
Was just going to post the same. Would be much better if we could hear the refs. Would also highlight any little bNot sure that you could mike up the ref in football matches unless you want to broadcast the players calling him a
for 90 minutes, mind.h players that gob off to the refs constantly. They should do it, might make the players think twice knowing their family can hear what they're saying. ORD said:
robsco said:
The decision last night was marginal. It is ludicrous to suggest that the referee should be able to make that decision and be correct 100% of the time, when he (previously) didn’t have the benefit of 15 replays to determine whether the call was correct or not. The truth is simple - Aguero was offside, the goal shouldn’t have stood. Without VAR last night, the wrong team would have progressed. Someone earlier on here even claimed that as City had been the better team throughout, they wouldn’t have resented them the winning goal even through a wrong call... bizarre!
To those saying that VAR takes the drama out of the game... last night proves if anything it can be quite the opposite. ORD I believe is a Utd fan? I imagine he wasn’t hammering VAR when Utd were given a last minute penalty through the same means at PSG.
I was over the moon with the decision, but it does not change the fact that my overall view of VAR, having seen it in quite a few games now, is that it makes football a worse spectacle.To those saying that VAR takes the drama out of the game... last night proves if anything it can be quite the opposite. ORD I believe is a Utd fan? I imagine he wasn’t hammering VAR when Utd were given a last minute penalty through the same means at PSG.
As for the suggestion above that a goal was "illegal", that's the kind of hysteria that I just do not understand. If the referee allows a goal to stand, it is legal. The ref decides what is a good goal. He may be wrong. But I really don't care.
I think a lot of you are missing one of the main advantages of VAR - the pressure and blame is being lifted from the (human) referee who is just trying to do his job so that 60,000 others can have an enjoyable evening.
Before VAR the amount of abuse directed at the refs was reaching hideous proportions, REALLY
No of us would have swapped places with them for even a minute due to it. Some famous refs bowed out of the game because of it. I was really concerned about where the next generation of refs was going to come from.
Now VAR is here and last night NOBODY could blame the ref - they now have to look elsewhere for somebody to carry the can for their team not progressing or at the very least see that the ref has a decision to make that is almost 50/50.
I don't like the delays but overall this is a win for the only man on the field hated by both sets of fans.
Before VAR the amount of abuse directed at the refs was reaching hideous proportions, REALLY
No of us would have swapped places with them for even a minute due to it. Some famous refs bowed out of the game because of it. I was really concerned about where the next generation of refs was going to come from.Now VAR is here and last night NOBODY could blame the ref - they now have to look elsewhere for somebody to carry the can for their team not progressing or at the very least see that the ref has a decision to make that is almost 50/50.
I don't like the delays but overall this is a win for the only man on the field hated by both sets of fans.
robsco said:
The decision last night was marginal. It is ludicrous to suggest that the referee should be able to make that decision and be correct 100% of the time, when he (previously) didn’t have the benefit of 15 replays to determine whether the call was correct or not. The truth is simple - Aguero was offside, the goal shouldn’t have stood. Without VAR last night, the wrong team would have progressed.
To those saying that VAR takes the drama out of the game... last night proves if anything it can be quite the opposite.
agree with most of thatTo those saying that VAR takes the drama out of the game... last night proves if anything it can be quite the opposite.
the danger is VAR kills the spontaneity, jubilation and elation of scoring a goal (unless a clear worldy), ball crosses over the line, no once celebrates until the ref confirms 30 seconds later the goal can stand, by which time the players, staff and fans have all calmed down and its polite hand shakes all round
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff