Coventry v Man Utd

[Zoophonic]

Lucky lucky barstewards

 

[TeaCider]

Such a strange post match interview from the winning team, reacting like they’ve gone out.

Understandable, they were lucky not to lose to a team from the Championship and the decisive moment was a skied penalty.

 

[Lemmy_kilmister]

What was Fernandes saying after his penalty ?

 

[TeaCider]

How the heck did Fernandes win man of the match?!

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

You can pretend otherwise, but letting obvious mistake stand because you like the story is ridiculous.

No it isn't. Applying a different standard of refereeing throughout the match is ridiculous. Just because you can't handle luck.

The story is why you watch the game in the first place.

 

[Chris_Boro]

No it isn't. Applying a different standard of refereeing throughout the match is ridiculous. Just because you can't handle luck.

The story is why you watch the game in the first place.

Different standards of refereeing are applied in every match.

He was offside. The right decision, in a big game, regardless who was in it.

 

[viv_andersons_nana]

No it isn't. Applying a different standard of refereeing throughout the match is ridiculous. Just because you can't handle luck.

The story is why you watch the game in the first place.

The stupidity of VAR, which also emphasises your point, is that yesterday they checked for a handball after a free kick was deflected off the wall and went wide. The referee gave a goal kick and then waited while VAR checked for a penalty. And then the game restarted with a goal kick. So we just arbitrarily restarted the game with a goal kick despite everyone knowing it should’ve been a corner. And yet we are constantly told this is a good thing.

It’s just absolute madness. Football is not better because of this.

 

[Malaguena]

Great quote on the BBC feed from some lad

I’m stood here at Wembley and the overriding feeling I’m getting is that Man U wouldn’t get out of the Championship

 

[TeaCider]

The stupidity of VAR, which also emphasises your point, is that yesterday they checked for a handball after a free kick was deflected off the wall and went wide. The referee gave a goal kick and then waited while VAR checked for a penalty. And then the game restarted with a goal kick. So we just arbitrarily restarted the game with a goal kick despite everyone knowing it was wrong.

It’s just absolute madness. Football is not better because of this.

It's not arbitrary though.

From the moment that VAR was introduced, they've not been allowed to interfere with wrongly given goal kicks, corners, throw-ins or yellow cards.

They've always been able to check offside and they got the decision correct today.

 

[Since1973]

Hopefully City put 6 into them in the final

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

Different standards of refereeing are applied in every match.

He was offside. The right decision, in a big game, regardless who was in it.

They aren't. You go to a championship game and the referee makes all the decisions aided by his linesmen.

In the premier league some of the game is reffed by a ref and some of it by a few blokes watching on Tele.

If a foul is not spotted five minutes before the disallowed goal that has just as much impact as the foul not spotted when the goal is scored.

 

[Ayresome_park]

Just a side note, how good is callum o'hare!! Really impressed

 

[LaPennaBianca]

No it isn't. Applying a different standard of refereeing throughout the match is ridiculous. Just because you can't handle luck.

The story is why you watch the game in the first place.

Luck is when the ball hits both posts and rolls out. Not when you score a goal that shouldn't stand as it contravenes the laws of the game.

And yes, you watch the game for the story - but the reason why the story is compelling is because the rules make it so. If a team was allowed to break them to help the story they'd be worth naught.

My son and I watched an episode of Bluey about this the other day - do you want a link?

 

[McMordie]

Terrible first half performance by Coventry.

 

[viv_andersons_nana]

It's not arbitrary though.

From the moment that VAR was introduced, they've not been allowed to interfere with wrongly given goal kicks, corners, throw-ins or yellow cards.

They've always been able to check offside and they got the decision correct today.

That proves what he’s saying though. We have game-changing mistakes and incidents peppered throughout the 90 minutes. Each and every touch, pass, bit of contact, is potentially a game-changing decision. Why would you just allow some wrong stuff to slide and pull it back for others. Why are you only rewinding the footage so far back. Why not go 5, 10, 15 seconds further back. You’ll find another infringement there if you slow it down and look hard enough. And the goal or red card you’re checking couldn’t have happened without that, highlighting that each and every touch of the ball is important and impacts the game.

 

[Chris_Boro]

They aren't. You go to a championship game and the referee makes all the decisions aided by his linesmen.

In the premier league some of the game is reffed by a ref and some of it by a few blokes watching on Tele.

If a foul is not spotted five minutes before the disallowed goal that has just as much impact as the foul not spotted when the goal is scored.

Not the point I was making. Not that there's any point in trying when you blatantly won't see beyond your own hatred of something.

He was offside by the current laws of the game. The correct decision was made in a big game, which is exactly the reason VAR was brought in.

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

Luck is when the ball hits both posts and rolls out. Not when you score a goal that shouldn't stand as it contravenes the laws of the game.

And yes, you watch the game for the story - but the reason why the story is compelling is because the rules make it so. If a team was allowed to break them to help the story they'd be worth naught.

My son and I watched an episode of Bluey about this the other day - do you want a link?

As I've stated the rules are applied unevenly.

You've run the goal through the television. What about the preceding twenty minutes play. What about all the fouls missed up in the build up.

Teams were allowed to break the rules during this period. Surely by your reckoning the story is therefore worth naught.

You should probably start watching some adult programming.

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

Not the point I was making. Not that there's any point in trying when you blatantly won't see beyond your own hatred of something.

He was offside by the current laws of the game. The correct decision was made in a big game, which is exactly the reason VAR was brought in.

What was the point you were making?

 

[viv_andersons_nana]

As I've stated the rules are applied unevenly.

You've run the goal through the television. What about the preceding twenty minutes play. What about all the fouls missed up in the build up.

Teams were allowed to break the rules during this period. Surely by your reckoning the story is therefore worth naught.

You should probably start watching some adult programming.

You put it more succinctly than I did. I would love to know who decides at which point we roll the footage back to. And why we don’t go back to the beginning of the ‘phase of play’ as they say. The end point can’t happen without a beginning point and everything in between, which if you pore over long enough will contain a number of infringements.

 

[Cress]

Motion capture reveals why VAR in football struggles with offside decisions

New research shows why VAR isn't always accurate enough to judge offside moments.

www.bath.ac.uk