Yes, Haaland's dissent was much stronger than Dalot's. But, different rules apply for United.
VAR and Refs | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
edit - ah, nevermind
So to sum up Dermot Gallagher, the referee had no choice but to send off Dalot (due to Climate change or w/e) but in the Nunez instance he chose not to.
what a plank.
what a plank.
I don't know what sort of contract Dermot Gallagher is on with Sky but I can't imagine it getting renewed.
Beyond offering zero insight he has zero charisma as well. The whole show is a waste of electricity.
Beyond offering zero insight he has zero charisma as well. The whole show is a waste of electricity.
They need to put Dermot out of his misery. Get an ex-ref in who can apply a consistent logic, argue a coherent case, and is not afraid to call out a mistake.
I think Gallagher is there as part of the contract the Premier League have with Sky and by extension how they look to protect the PGMOL.
Why is Nunez deliberately charging at an unaware Evans and putting his shoulder through his chest with no sporting intentions merely a yellow but Casemiro gets a red for touching someone's collar and Rashford gets a red for endangering an opponent by accidentally standing on a foot?
We really need a review of what violent conduct is in the game based on the potential harm, not archaic made up rules about rAiSiNg YoUr HaNdS being an automatic red but thuggery like that from Nunez intended to injure opponents being only a yellow.
We really need a review of what violent conduct is in the game based on the potential harm, not archaic made up rules about rAiSiNg YoUr HaNdS being an automatic red but thuggery like that from Nunez intended to injure opponents being only a yellow.
It wasn't even a yellow. He got a yellow for booting the ball away.
None exist.
Turkish presidents at it again, Istanbulspor vs Trabzonspor has just been "stopped" as VAR didn't call a foul against Trabzon for their 2nd so the president came down and pulled his team off the pitch
That's mental. Imagine if I just charged at someone in Safeways and put my shoulder through their chest, I'd go to prison.
You could apply all manner of incidents from a game in this way though.
Holding a stranger, kicking them, elbowing them, shoving them over, running after them, swearing at them / abusive behaviour.
I guess the club are just not going to appeal the decision then?
What's the point though? They'd probably make up article 7.8.3 of the making shit up up code of officiating: which stipulates any and all appeals by clubs called Manchester United will result in the punishment being increased.
It's a well known rule we fall foul of constantly. So well known they just make it up. Such is the high level of refereeing we are dealing with.
Even if they wanted to they couldn't, you cannot appeal yellow cards
You need a ref who isn't mates with the current active group. He can't give a balanced opinion for fear of upsetting his mates. Does Colina speak English? Give that man what he wants to do the segment!!!
This is something I have said we should have done when we had pathetic calls against us. Today, that was never foul. He just run unbalanced into a player. Pretty wierd from their president. I wonder what that president would say if he was our president and saw all those calls we have been served this year. He wouldn't even have allowed us to travel to games.Turkish presidents at it again, Istanbulspor vs Trabzonspor has just been "stopped" as VAR didn't call a foul against Trabzon for their 2nd so the president came down and pulled his team off the pitch
No VAR in the EFL cup has saved Chelsea really. Caicedo should have been given a straight red in the first half.
Yellow is fine there, borderline red. No need for slow motion re refereeing it.
https://www.skysports.com/watch/vid...caicedo-escapes-a-red-card-for-foul-on-gordon
The game is massively better without VAR...
Studs raking down Gordon’s calf with no chance of winning the ball. That’s a red.
Agree. That was one ugly tackle. I don't think it was on purpose but still.
I haven't seen it but whether it was on purpose or not is irrelevant
Bollocks decision. Taylor is fecking worse than Oliver.
Doesn't give a pen for Watkins being shoved over earlier, yet a little arm on the keeper when they ended up having the ball in loads of space to clear, ruled out. Madness.
Havent seen the pen situation, but it’s a clear freekick to the GK
How can you not give penalty there?
He is playing tennis with his arm.
He is playing tennis with his arm.
So “clear” that the VAR had to watch the replay about twenty times, resulting in the goal being disallowed a shade under four minutes after the ball hitting the net.
penalties have been awarded for softer "fouls" this season
Not sure why they took so long to find a proper angle, but it’s obvious that the Villa player is holding on to the goalkeepers arm and preventing him
He never would have given a free kick if the goal didn't go in though and the forward was getting his shirt tugged first in any case.
Because he didn’t stand a chance of actually seeing it from his angle. The Aston Villa player is literally holding the goalkeepers arm, preventing the goalkeeper from having a chance of getting the ball and you’re arguing it’s not a freekick? Come on
Well for a start the forward was getting his shirt tugged off him before any contact with the keeper. There's at least 3 touches by defenders and two of them have good possession where they could have cleared it. To me that's a new phase of play so any foul is moot.
Villa should have had two or three pens.
Duran not getting a red is ridiculous, his elbow after the whistle caused a bleeding wound but Robinson didn't go down.
The Villa disallowed goal was a foul but it's really opening a can of worms to start relitigating events not really directly related to the goal. Reminds me a bit of Scott McTominay's goal being ruled out vs Fulham, as if they were looking for an excuse not to give it.
Keeper was weak? Villa player literally held his arm to prevent the keeper from going for the ball and he succeeded with it. No idea why people are consistently re-inventing rules. It’s a freekick every single time.
Yes, he was weak.
First foul was on the Villa player, who was going to pressure the keeper, he was then dragged into the goal by the Sheffield Utd defender, that's the only reason he reaches out and grabs the keepers arm. There are also 3 Villa players are being held by the Sheffield Utd players.
They then had 3 chances to clear the ball and tried to play out of a crowded box, when they spent the rest of the game kicking for touch.
Ridiculous decision to disallow that goal.
It’s fairly mental to call it weak, if you try jumping while someone is holding your arm you won’t get very far. No idea why people struggle so badly to take into considerations the actual effects. Shoulder to shoulder on the pitch is one thing, but it’s piss easy to have a big impact on the ability to jump for a ball by going into the body and fecking up their balance, which even slight nudges can do. Holding the arm of the goalkeeper to prevent him going for a ball is such an obvious foul it’s actually bizarre to suggest otherwise.
The only thing to take into consideration here is if the first situation warrants a penalty to Villa or not. In terms of it being a new phase since Sheffield have had the opportunity to clear it, no idea really.
It shouldn't be disallowed, because the first foul is on the Villa player, who then impacts the keeper, who I would still say was weak there, he should be able to get away from that situation before the contact.
But as usual with VAR they just look for a reason to disallow the goal.