I thought it was a red myself. Kicking out at the standing leg like that? Ball long gone? Off with him. Spent all game having fond memories of Chiellini shoving him around like a rag doll.Yellows can't be given out by VAR which is frankly stupid also. Only if it was worthy of a red card.
Even a 2nd yellow card that would send somebody off can't be contested!
Arsenal-Mania goes into Meltdown
- Thread starter Kaush949
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) look forward to a new life under Ruben Amorim. What system will we be playing? What players will impress? and how will it all go? We also say goodbye to Ruud Van Nistelrooy and review United's 3-0 win at home against Leicester City.
This is pure gold 
can a loss be a win?
Not a patch on the dippers who will cheat and claim to be victims of the said cheating whilst also benefiting from it simultaneously.
The media outrage over VAR’s intervention was full of terrible takes and hilarious contradiction. “Well it was a soft foul…” still a foul though and Odegaard got all of Eriksen and zero of the ball leading directly to the goal. How fecking obvious does it have to be for the dimwits in the media?
Not from that forum, but this looks like a diversion in similar vein: the wrong socks
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/19705343/arsenal-socks-kit-clash-saka-man-utd/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/19705343/arsenal-socks-kit-clash-saka-man-utd/
their ABU bias was shining through. I was shocked at Hasslebaink seething about it who’s usually quite level headed. very odd.
I get we don’t want VAR cancelling goals for not obvious decisions, but this is a foul all day long. If Odegaard brushes the ball away I could understand the uproar but he gets nowhere near it
Yeah, he is nowhere near the ball, pushes with his hands and clips Eriksen with his knee. I don’t see how not calling this is not a clear and obvious error. This is what VAR is for.
The clear and obvious error was that Tierney thought Odegaard made contact with the ball but clearly the highlights show otherwise and thus VAR turns it around. What’s funny about this is that United supporters are generally calm and laid back about this recent run but all the ABUs are seething thinking we’re back, and it shows.
What is ABU? Abu Ghraib? American Board of Urology? A minor Sumerian deity?
It stands for anyone but United. The mentality that they don't care who wins as long as it isn't united. Stems from the days under Ferguson when we broke their bitter hearts over and over again.
You’re on a United forum mate, you should know.
Always Buying Umbrellas
This clear and obvious error thing is the most ridiculous excuse for allowing mistakes I've ever heard. Did the ref give a foul initially? No. Was it a foul on replay? Yes. Then it was a foul, clearly!
Arse, Bollocks, Uterus.
I agree. You can’t let a goal like that stand. VAR has made changes in the offside rule so it’s adapting but that goal should never have stood and thankfully Tierney and the VAR official correctly applied the rules.
Arsenal, winner of the hearts
The Arsenal tears have been hilarious. This is a team who have beaten 5 sides in the bottom half as of right now, one of which was massively undercooked after a disruptive pre-season on opening day and another who could've and probably should've got a point against them last week.
It wasn't a vintage United performance but it didn't have to be because they're still a naive team who will probably fall away when they have to contend with playing 3 games a week again on a regular basis. They're a slightly better team than they were last season but the same frailties are still there, and that includes their manager.
It wasn't a vintage United performance but it didn't have to be because they're still a naive team who will probably fall away when they have to contend with playing 3 games a week again on a regular basis. They're a slightly better team than they were last season but the same frailties are still there, and that includes their manager.
Totally agree.
We've literally been scoring the same goal against them since 2003 and after every one, they go on about us being shit, them being so much better at playing "actual football" and all we have is the counter attack.
Er... yeah lads, but that counterattack has beaten ye to league titles and European trophies. If it's so shit, why not figure out a way to stop it.
We outplayed them with total football for the opening goal, didn’t we?
I’m surprised they are so entitled. They weren’t deserving of anything, we roasted them.
I’m surprised they are so entitled. They weren’t deserving of anything, we roasted them.
Ok, this is where we disagree here. The referee was 6ft way from the foul, he saw it and allowed it. This is where I have a serious problem with VAR. If the referee DIDN'T see it and then the VAR asked him to take a look, I would say fine, that's the job of VAR. However, not calling a foul you saw that indirectly caused goal but changing your mind afterwards is why I have a serious problem with VAR.
Why though? It's possible that the ref saw it in realtime and thought Odegaard won the ball. Nothing wrong with going back and saying nevermind, that's a foul.
It's the same logic as a pen. Ref makes a call, VAR disagrees, they have another look. Why are fouls outside the penalty box any different?
This doesn’t really work. Because the ref probably did see it but thought Odegaard won the ball. In that instance the ref can’t stop the game because he doesn’t believe a foul has occurred. The game plays on and VAR rightfully reviews it because the play led to a goal.
We can argue whether it was soft or hard foul all day. A soft foul is still a foul. VAR worked exactly how it should have done for this incident.
Would win the league if the season was six games long.
I don't think VAR should be the authority here that's all. With regards to a penalty, I think it's slightly different as players do try to trick referees into giving them and it's seldom like that outside the box.
We could agree to disagree on this one.
They're a good bunch, I enjoy posting on that forum.
Yeah, that's the part I don't like. However, I think the situation IS different only because his 'mistake' led to a goal. If it didn't, we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's one of my pet peeves with VAR, don't mind me.
But that’s the whole point of VAR. To rectify a “clear and obvious” error. In this case, the ref made a clear and obvious error in believing it was a fair tackle. It wasn’t.Yeah, that's the part I don't like. However, I think the situation IS different only because his 'mistake' led to a goal. If it didn't, we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's one of my pet peeves with VAR, don't mind me.
The ref probably thought it was Odegaard who kicked the ball away which is easy to think in real time. But it was eriksens foot that kicks the ball.
I have a problem with the 'clear and obvious' part of VAR. Let's be honest, everything looks different in slow motion and if a ref deems a tackle 'okay' during normal play, it should be allowed. As I said, it's my problem with VAR as nothing is 'clear and obvious' during the speed of the game. Slow it down, it looks worse.
This is partly true. However, in this case, it was a clear and obvious error. Odegaard was nowhere near the ball but brought Eriksen down.
If it was as you think, the referee would have stood by his decision. He didn’t.
Case closed.
He allowed it because he thought Odegaard touched it, when he quite clearly didn't. It's not hard to realise he made a mistake.
He saw it on the screen and agreed. If he didn't agree then why would he change his decision?
It's a foul.
I just don’t get this logic. Part of the point about VAR is that humans make mistakes in judgment that can now be rectified.
I think he means human mistakes should be a part of the game. It was one of the arguing points against the implementation of var. Interrupting the flow, and making the game too perfect.
wtf, the whole point of VAR is to get to the right decision.
What a bizarre take
What a bizarre take
I refer arsenal fans to the goal disallowed against Spurs when McTominay's fingers accidentally very lightly brushed the face of Son about 4 passes before a goal was scored. Referee looked at the replay and gave a foul. Notice how United went on to win that game after spurs went up the other end and scored a few minutes later.
It's almost as if you don't have to capitulate if a decision goes against you.
It's almost as if you don't have to capitulate if a decision goes against you.
So maybe arsenal lost because of one VAR decision went against them, rightfully so, and no because they did feck all with all their nice possession and tiki taka outside our box which led to only 3 fecking shots on goal over 90 mins of football? I can see through their fans eyes now!
I can see through their fans eyes now!Forgot about that one, very similar but Odegaards one was more of a foul.
I don't think VAR should be the authority here that's all. With regards to a penalty, I think it's slightly different as players do try to trick referees into giving them and it's seldom like that outside the box.
We could agree to disagree on this one.
VAR isn't the authority. The on-field ref is. They're just another ref with access to replays who can help him ensure the correct decision is reached. Just because you're right on the spot doesn't mean you actually see everything. He was looking right at the studs into Bruno's leg challenge, which was worthy of a card, and didn't give a free either, for example. The reason the only go back for goal incidents is because it's a major event. If there was no goal scored it's not worth stopping the game and looking at replays over a minor foul that had little consequence to the outcome of the game.