VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

[eire-red]

What's embarrassing is Arteta will (and probably has) just shrug it off with vague notions about what a tough job the refs do if a major incorrect decision goes in Arsenal's favour. So this isn't about protecting the integrity of the game or improving the game for everyone, as I've seen some Arsenal fans characterise it. It's just an emotional outburst because he's upset they lost the game and the club doubled down on it the following day trying to bully officials into giving them decisions in future games.

100%

Arteta, and all managers to be fair, couldn't be bothered about the fairness of VAR, as long as they're on the right end of the decisions.

I actually get it and respect it, given how high pressure it is. But wrapping the moaning in the guise of "betterment of the game" is embarrassing.

 

[Daydreamer]

I hate that lego hair prick and them gooners but seriously, how can anyone view the Joelinton foul on Gabriel as not a foul or is "subjective"? The fellow had both hands on the back of the defender ffs. Any where on the field that happens, it is a clear foul.

There’s definite tribalism at play. He’s ducked to come up for the header and been pushed in the back with both arms. It’s clear as day.

I have no problem with the Ref missing it, btw. From his point of view it’s very easy to miss. But the fact that VAR didn’t even send him to the monitor to have a look is inexcusable.

 

[Superden]

Gordon was obviously offside as the ball didnt go backwards to him and there werent 2 players in line or in front of him, and yet the VAR couldnt decide as there were no clear camera angles (WTF?), and the pundits have glossed over it.
The other decisions are marginal and subjective, but this is a bit more cut and dried and i can see where the issues come into play about integrity.

it is odd that referees and the people involved in the structure around that part of the game can be employed by the same people that own football clubs they normally officiate.

 

[Jeppers7]

There’s definite tribalism at play. He’s ducked to come up for the header and been pushed in the back with both arms. It’s clear as day.

I have no problem with the Ref missing it, btw. From his point of view it’s very easy to miss. But the fact that VAR didn’t even send him to the monitor to have a look is inexcusable.

It’s a blatant foul. Ridiculous for that goal to stand. You have to give the benefit to the same team in three seperate situations in a matter of seconds and the push alone is enough.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

The vids unavailable and your hypothetical situation is quite different so I don't see the point in discussing that.

The fact that it is a natural motion due to jumping and then landing (he's not randomly sticking an arm out) and the proximity doesn't come into it for you?

It is not different. Handball isn't about where the action happens in the 18. It's about the action itself. And I see that the video isn't available. Not sure why. But it explains it all. I'm not expressing my opinion. I'm expressing a fact...

 

[SadlerMUFC]

But and it’s quite an important part, he was there !

You can be there and not interfere. Maguire didn't interfere. So he's not offside. Put it this way. If there are 2 players running for a ball. One is in an offside position and the other isn't, and the player who is onside gets the ball, is the play offside? No it's not. Because the offside player doesn't touch the ball. According to your argument, the correct call would be offside just because he goes for it. He has to interfere with play to be offside. Maguire doesn't interfere with play. In fact, if the goal stood, there would be little to no controversy. The fact that it has been called off has created controversy. That in itself should tell you something...

 

[terraloo]

The first part of the debate was the ball in or out and VAR would not only get involved if it was a clear and obvious which it’s difficult to see it meets that threshold

Moving towards the ball isn't an off-side offence. Neither is the often trotted out generic phrase 'interfering with play'



Harry isn't challenging the defender for the ball. He isn't clearly obstructing the defenders line of vision or clearly preventing the opponent from playing the ball.

It's his forlorn attempt to play the ball which has done him.



It's not so cut and dried when you watch the full incident from the wide angle shot which shows the action which occurred before the start of this clip. Contact and the defender leaning forward of his own volition has already occurred before this clip starts. Either this shot didn't pick up the earlier action or they've edited it out to make it appear worse than it is.

1) Try reading this part of the law again

• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

The obvious action or actions were as I said he moving to the ball not just the missed attempt to play the ball

2) Despite what you say “ interfering with play is in the law

 

[horsechoker]

How long until a goal is ruled out because his "aura" was interfering with play?

 

[SadlerMUFC]

I think there's a bit more nuance in the rules which, thankfully, allow referees to use a modicum of common sense with handballs like Barkley's.

This is all there is in the rules about 'natural position':

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised

There is some leeway there around consequence of the action, but it's not a free pass to dive in. The PL guidelines are more prescriptive, but still include allowances for proximity and shoulder height threshold. So if the ball had struck Barkley's hand above his head, that would be different compared to under his arm at below the shoulder.

You can certainly make a case for a handball under the more prescriptive version of the rules that have been in place in recent years, but I don't think it's cut-and-dried and it's sufficiently open to interpretation to allow a sensible decision to be made.

But that was the whole point of the new law. To take "interpretation" out of the equation. In the link that I posted (that isn't working for some reason), an official is doing a workshop with a couple hundred other officials. In the class he shows several videos of "handball". He then asks the refs to raise their hand on which play they would all call a foul on. The room is split on most of the calls. And this was the problem. So they wanted to erase that "interpretation" so that all refs will call it the same way. I personally think that the handball rule is broken. I don't think the incident like Barkley's should be a handball. But according to the Laws of the Game it is. Or let me change that. I think that any time a ball hits a hand, a handball should be called. But I think the punishment should vary. For example, in Barkely's case, where he clearly has no idea and is very close to VVD, I'd like to see that given as an indirect free kick inside the 18. For others that are more clinical, award a penalty. Does that make sense?

 

[CoopersDream]

You can be there and not interfere. Maguire didn't interfere. So he's not offside. Put it this way. If there are 2 players running for a ball. One is in an offside position and the other isn't, and the player who is onside gets the ball, is the play offside? No it's not. Because the offside player doesn't touch the ball. According to your argument, the correct call would be offside just because he goes for it. He has to interfere with play to be offside. Maguire doesn't interfere with play. In fact, if the goal stood, there would be little to no controversy. The fact that it has been called off has created controversy. That in itself should tell you something...

It is only a controversy because United fans thinks there is an conspiracy against them. It is literally right there in the rules, you just chose to interpret the rules in a way (or maybe just thinks the rules should be something they are not) that makes you think it is not offside.

 

[Hammondo]

I'll probably never understand why Arsenal have made such a big deal about that decision.

There was no conclusive evidence to call the ball out of play or call it offside. The fact that there is a proper debate between pundits on whether there was a foul or not, makes it not a clear and obvious error. It was a marginal call that sometimes goes in your favour and sometimes against.

Arsenal had a point to feel aggrieved, but that was on how Bruno G managed to stay on for the entirety of the game, and that is something Arteta should have stressed on. And definitely, there was no decision that was so outrageous that it required a club putting out a statement.

It looked clearly in for me.

 

[Withnail]

1) Try reading this part of the law again

• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

The obvious action or actions were as I said he moving to the ball not just the missed attempt to play the ball

2) Despite what you say “ interfering with play is in the law

On pt 2, yes it is sorry but it's in only used in the context of playing the ball. What I meant was it's widely used to describe any kind of interference in general and the meaning has been obscured. It's become quite nebulous and not representative of what is written.

On the first point, the opponent's ability to play the ball wasn't clearly impacted by the run of Maguire. You can surmise that he may have made a different run or been in a different position and got there before Garnacho but in the absence of Maguire he could well have marked somebody else entirely. This is beside the fact that he was never really in a position to play the ball in the first place.

 

[11101]

I'll probably never understand why Arsenal have made such a big deal about that decision.

There was no conclusive evidence to call the ball out of play or call it offside. The fact that there is a proper debate between pundits on whether there was a foul or not, makes it not a clear and obvious error. It was a marginal call that sometimes goes in your favour and sometimes against.

Arsenal had a point to feel aggrieved, but that was on how Bruno G managed to stay on for the entirety of the game, and that is something Arteta should have stressed on. And definitely, there was no decision that was so outrageous that it required a club putting out a statement.

I think if the ball had carried on it would have hit the corner flag, which shows it was still in.

It's definitely a foul outside the box but in the box its the kind of challenge referees are inconsistent on. We have had goals overturned for less and had far worse against us go unpunished including against Arsenal.

Arteta is following the SAF rulebook as copied by Klopp. He's made such a big fuss Arsenal will get a few in their favour now. It's about time ETH had the guts to do the same for us.

 

[Red in STL]

I think you have to use common sense. If an offside player actively prevents a defender from playing the ball then fair enough. I don’t see that happening here though. The defender didn’t seem to have any interest in playing the ball. All they were doing was trying to stop Maguire getting to it.

Common sense and football, that ship ailed a long time ago!

If Maguire hadn't taken a big swing at the ball it would probably have stood, the fact that he attempted to play the ball is why he's "active" and as such is deemed offside

 

[stevoc]

That part may be so but the simple fact is that once Maguire made an attempt to play the ball he became active and that means he was correctly given offside.

From that point on everything thing else becomes irrelevant things like he didn’t get to the ball etc just don’t get considered . It’s not been mentioned but it could be viewed that had Maguire not made an attempt to play the ball the keeper may have re acted differently

Was Maguire offside when Garnacho crossed the ball?

Because when the initial free kick comes in McTominay is actually offside, given that he scored but VAR didn't seem to have a problem that. I can only assume it was considered to have moved onto a different phase of play. In which case Maguire attempting to play the ball after the cross is irrelevant no?

 

[Powderfinger]

It’s a blatant foul. Ridiculous for that goal to stand. You have to give the benefit to the same team in three seperate situations in a matter of seconds and the push alone is enough.

Pretty much. The only reason it’s even a big conversation is that a certain set of pundits always protect the referees and then football tribalism makes fans of rival clubs try to find reasons to dismiss the obvious. A foul clear as day, it’s hard to be more clear.

VAR is broken, it’s not a system for arriving at correct decisions. We’ve seen it a million times and this is just another example.

 

[lex talionis]

The only aspect of the Newcastle goal that warranted disallowing it was the clear push on the back. Clear as day, but the referee lost his nerve and overlooked it, or perhaps he felt the Arsenal player was making a meal of it, which he was, but it was a clear foul.

 

[stevoc]

How long until a goal is ruled out because his "aura" was interfering with play?

VAR has called the Ref to view the pitch side monitor. Ref disallows goal, because while an attacking player didn't actually move towards the ball, subjectively the Ref after reading the attackers body language deemed that he intended to do so. The keeper might have read it the same way and it possibly affected his judgement.

 

[SAFMUTD]

What's embarrassing is Arteta will (and probably has) just shrug it off with vague notions about what a tough job the refs do if a major incorrect decision goes in Arsenal's favour. So this isn't about protecting the integrity of the game or improving the game for everyone, as I've seen some Arsenal fans characterise it. It's just an emotional outburst because he's upset they lost the game and the club doubled down on it the following day trying to bully officials into giving them decisions in future games.

And we all know it'll work. It's been proven time and time again.

It's crybaby stuff specially when managers go out and claim "referees are humans and we need to understand they can make mistakes as well" when they get calls in their favour.

But if any team has been fecked by VAR this season it's us, we should be doing some ranting so the 50-50s go our way. Matches are won inside and outside the pitch.

 

[stevoc]

And we all know it'll work. It's been proven time and time again.

It's crybaby stuff specially when managers go out and claim "referees are humans and we need to understand they can make mistakes as well" when they get calls in their favour.

But if any team has been fecked by VAR this season it's us, we should be doing some ranting so the 50-50s go our way. Matches are won inside and outside the pitch.

The sad thing is moaning about decisions actually seems to work, make a big enough stink and it puts a bit of doubt in the officials heads over the next few games. Especially if you manage to get one of those nice shiny PGMOL apologies that United never get.

ETH and United not complaining about the crazy string of decisions that have went against us this season has probably worked against us. Ferguson was a master at calling out Refs, he always did it in a calculating manner that benefitted us over the course of a season. Erik's a bit of a pussy cat in this regard, he barely says a peep about the refs/VAR.

 

[CoopersDream]

Was Maguire offside when Garnacho crossed the ball?

Because when the initial free kick comes in McTominay is actually offside, given that he scored but VAR didn't seem to have a problem that. I can only assume it was considered to have moved onto a different phase of play. In which case Maguire attempting to play the ball after the cross is irrelevant no?

No, he was offside when Eriksen crossed the ball. As another poster mentioned, there was a similar situation in the Brentford v Burnley game a few weeks back. The difference in that situation was that the ball got nowhere near to the offside player nor he did make an attempt to play the ball (as the ball was crossed a couple of yard before it reached the offside player). It was offside anyway.

 

[SAFMUTD]

The sad thing is moaning about decisions actually seems to work, make a big enough stink and it puts a bit of doubt in the officials heads over the next few games. Especially if you manage to get one of those nice shiny PGMOL apologies that United never get.

ETH and United not complaining about the crazy string of decisions that have went against us this season has probably worked against us. Ferguson was a master at calling out Refs, he always did it in a calculating manner that benefitted us over the course of a season. Erik's a bit of a pussy cat in this regard, he barely says a peep about the refs/VAR.

I think ten Hag do it in a gentle man way, for the honour of the game I like it that way but we've got so many ridiculous decisions against us that enough is enough.

I'm convinced if we'd had make a big fuss out of the first big mistake against us many of the others wouldn't had happened. The referees as humans feel the pressure next 50-50 call against arsenal unconsciously they'll think about all the fuss is was made and say nah I don't fancy to be involved in another one just give it to arsenal.

There's a reason home teams get most of the 50-50 calls the stand cheering and boos influence the referees decisions. That influence is done outside the pitch as well.

 

[Bosws87]

You can see why the rules are so terrible there's always a bunch of people that genuinely think it's the correct decision its impossible.

How you can watch years of football then decide Maguire being offside was the correct decision, it's baffling! You have been watching the exact same thing happen in nearly every other attack ever.

It's quite clear the officiating is corrupt in the league, be it protecting their own staff, conflict of interests or individual bias. Having people involved in the sport that can reach out, contact and influence people at government level was always going to cause huge integrity problems and here we are.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

And we all know it'll work. It's been proven time and time again.

It's crybaby stuff specially when managers go out and claim "referees are humans and we need to understand they can make mistakes as well" when they get calls in their favour.

But if any team has been fecked by VAR this season it's us, we should be doing some ranting so the 50-50s go our way. Matches are won inside and outside the pitch.

The sad thing is moaning about decisions actually seems to work, make a big enough stink and it puts a bit of doubt in the officials heads over the next few games. Especially if you manage to get one of those nice shiny PGMOL apologies that United never get.

ETH and United not complaining about the crazy string of decisions that have went against us this season has probably worked against us. Ferguson was a master at calling out Refs, he always did it in a calculating manner that benefitted us over the course of a season. Erik's a bit of a pussy cat in this regard, he barely says a peep about the refs/VAR.

That’s a myth. Klopp has been losing his shit about tight VAR (or refereeing calls) going back years. And which team got most blatantly screwed over by VAR this season? Liverpool.

It’s all just noise. Managers are forever yapping and moaning. All of them. But that can’t have any influence on how VAR calls are made in the moment.

 

[stevoc]

I think ten Hag do it in a gentle man way, for the honour of the game I like it that way but we've got so many ridiculous decisions against us that enough is enough.

I'm convinced if we'd had make a big fuss out of the first big mistake against us many of the others wouldn't had happened. The referees as humans feel the pressure next 50-50 call against arsenal unconsciously they'll think about all the fuss is was made and say nah I don't fancy to be involved in another one just give it to arsenal.

There's a reason home teams get most of the 50-50 calls the stand cheering and boos influence the referees decisions. That influence is done outside the pitch as well.

I don't know for sure but I'm of the opinion that it can't hurt to call Refs out on their shit decisions. At the very least try to highlight to see if the media pick up on it and run with a week long injustice campaign like they did for the 50/50 that went against Wolves.

That’s a myth. Klopp has been losing his shit about tight VAR (or refereeing calls) going back years. And which team got most blatantly screwed over by VAR this season? Liverpool.

It’s all just noise. Managers are forever yapping and moaning. All of them. But that can’t have any influence on how VAR calls are made in the moment.

Maybe mate, but there had to be a reason Ferguson moaned about refs for 3 decades. Liverpool did get fecked over on that offside true, but the PGMOL were falling over themselves to apologise for it, which may or may not have affected decisions againt them in subsequent games. I reckon if that had been against us they wouldn't have bothered as they know Erik won't kick up a fuss.

 

[stevoc]

No, he was offside when Eriksen crossed the ball. As another poster mentioned, there was a similar situation in the Brentford v Burnley game a few weeks back. The difference in that situation was that the ball got nowhere near to the offside player nor he did make an attempt to play the ball (as the ball was crossed a couple of yard before it reached the offside player). It was offside anyway.

Fair enough this is where I'm having trouble with it. If Maguire's offside for the Eriksen cross ok, but if he's onside for the Garnacho cross then him attempting to play the ball should be irrevlevent. If the goal was ruled out simply for Maguires head being offside when the ball was lofted over him, as ridiculous as I find that fair enough. But in that case I've no idea why people keep mentioning him attempting to play the ball after the Garnacho cross.

 

[gaffs]

I thought he McTominay goal was right to be chalked off. Had Maguire not been there, the Fulham defender would have had an easier job in trying to stop the free kick reaching Garnacho.

Pre VAR, that never gets seen.

 

[gaffs]

You can see why the rules are so terrible there's always a bunch of people that genuinely think it's the correct decision its impossible.

How you can watch years of football then decide Maguire being offside was the correct decision, it's baffling! You have been watching the exact same thing happen in nearly every other attack ever.

It's quite clear the officiating is corrupt in the league, be it protecting their own staff, conflict of interests or individual bias. Having people involved in the sport that can reach out, contact and influence people at government level was always going to cause huge integrity problems and here we are.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I don't know for sure but I'm of the opinion that it can't hurt to call Refs out on their shit decisions. At the very least try to highlight to see if the media pick up on it and run with a week long injustice campaign like they did for the 50/50 that went against Wolves.

Funny you should mention Wolves. Victims of a much worse VAR decision than United this weekend. The second time they’ve had VAR award an unbelievably harsh penalty against them after their game against us. Using your rationale shouldn’t they be getting calls in their favour? Instead, the exact opposite is happening.

 

[Danny]

I thought he McTominay goal was right to be chalked off. Had Maguire not been there, the Fulham defender would have had an easier job in trying to stop the free kick reaching Garnacho.

Pre VAR, that never gets seen.

I'm not sure on this. I can see why it's given as offside but at the same time I don't think the Fulham player would reach the ball if Maguire wasn't there- very hard to judge so shouldn't the onfield decision be the one they side with?

 

[Jeppers7]

Dermott Gallagher ‘They definitely made the right decision’ on McT disallowed goal

It’s funny how he’s always definitively certain when it comes to decisions against us. Gabriel’s foul on Hojlund he said he’d have been ‘shocked if that was given’ yet felt that the penalty City got last week was the correct call.

 

[gaffs]

I'm not sure on this. I can see why it's given as offside but at the same time I don't think the Fulham player would reach the ball if Maguire wasn't there- very hard to judge so shouldn't the onfield decision be the one they side with?

I think the defender has a good chance of getting to that cross without Maguire being there.
As you see from below, they are both fighting to get to the ball. Harry goes across the defender and they make contact. That tells me that Maguire is involved in the play.
Even the commentator on the MUTV clip from YouTube says as the ball comes across "Maguire's there".

 

[stevoc]

Funny you should mention Wolves. Victims of a much worse VAR decision than United this weekend. The second time they’ve had VAR award an unbelievably harsh penalty against them after their game against us. Using your rationale shouldn’t they be getting calls in their favour? Instead, the exact opposite is happening.

Hey I'm not claiming it actually works in 100% of cases or that it's an exact science but all I am saying it surely couldn't hurt for Erik to at least highlight shit decisions against us. Because I know him not saying anything definitely hasn't helped us in that regard this season as we seem to be the most fecked over side in terms of bad Ref/VAR calls.

 

[stevoc]

Dermott Gallagher ‘They definitely made the right decision’ on McT disallowed goal

It’s funny how he’s always definitively certain when it comes to decisions against us. Gabriel’s foul on Hojlund he said he’d have been ‘shocked if that was given’ yet felt that the penalty City got last week was the correct call.

Persenter: What do you think of this decision Demot, was it correct?

Dermot: Correct decision.

Presenter: And this one?

Dermot: Correct decision.

Presenter: But what about this one Dermot?

Dermot: Correct decision.

Presenter: Thanks for joining us Dermot.

 

[Longshanks]

I think the defender has a good chance of getting to that cross without Maguire being there.
As you see from below, they are both fighting to get to the ball. Harry goes across the defender and they make contact. That tells me that Maguire is involved in the play.
Even the commentator on the MUTV clip from YouTube says as the ball comes across "Maguire's there".

Its a paradox, if Maguire wasn't in that exact location would the defender actually be there? Wherever Maguire is the defender follows because he is quite clearly man marking him.

You can't just imagine Maguire isn't there he will be somewhere. If he makes his run more into the centre the defender will follow him. Meaning he would definetley not be able to play the ball.

The defender doesn't try and play the ball he doesn't look at the ball, he doesn't try and get round Maguire or try and stop the ball getting to garnacho he just tries to make Maguire's life difficult from behind. If you take Maguire out of the equation the defender wouldn't be there.

 

[Withnail]

I thought he McTominay goal was right to be chalked off. Had Maguire not been there, the Fulham defender would have had an easier job in trying to stop the free kick reaching Garnacho.

Pre VAR, that never gets seen.

He was only just off. You don't re-imagine the situation as if United were playing with 10 men in order to figure out if it's an offence. That's absurd.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Hey I'm not claiming it actually works in 100% of cases or that it's an exact science but all I am saying it surely couldn't hurt for Erik to at least highlight shit decisions against us. Because I know him not saying anything definitely hasn't helped us in that regard this season as we seem to be the most fecked over side in terms of bad Ref/VAR calls.

I just don’t think it makes any difference at all. The errors have all been a factor of VAR not being fit for purpose and/or human error under pressure. The idea that, in the moment, the officials will take into account what various managers have and haven’t said in the weeks leading up to those few seconds just doesn’t hold water at all. And I, for one, am happy the club I support doesn’t get involved in the sort of hysterical nonsense we’ve seen from Arteta/Arsenal this week.

 

[gaffs]

Its a paradox, if Maguire wasn't in that exact location would the defender actually be there? Wherever Maguire is the defender follows because he is quite clearly man marking him.

You can't just imagine Maguire isn't there he will be somewhere. If he makes his run more into the centre the defender will follow him. Meaning he would definetley not be able to play the ball.

The defender doesn't try and play the ball he doesn't look at the ball, he doesn't try and get round Maguire or try and stop the ball getting to garnacho he just tries to make Maguire's life difficult from behind. If you take Maguire out of the equation the defender wouldn't be there.

No ifs or buts required. No paradox. Fact is, Maguire was involved in the play and he was in an offside position.

If he was onside would that have changed the outcome? Maybe not, but as soon as he makes an effort to play the ball, and potentially prevents the defender reaching it, he is involved in the play.

Contrary to what you said, the defender is looking at the ball...

He then looks to play the ball but can't because Maguire has him blocked out....

Why has Maguire got the defender blocked out? Because he is trying to get the ball first, therefore involved in play.

Really not a difficult one to understand.

 

[terraloo]

You can be there and not interfere. Maguire didn't interfere. So he's not offside. Put it this way. If there are 2 players running for a ball. One is in an offside position and the other isn't, and the player who is onside gets the ball, is the play offside? No it's not. Because the offside player doesn't touch the ball. According to your argument, the correct call would be offside just because he goes for it. He has to interfere with play to be offside. Maguire doesn't interfere with play. In fact, if the goal stood, there would be little to no controversy. The fact that it has been called off has created controversy. That in itself should tell you something...

Here’s when You are considered to be offside

Offside offence

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

• interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
• interfering with an opponent by:
  • preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
  • challenging an opponent for the ball or
  • clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
  • making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

So did he challenge for the ball ?
Did he attempt to play the ball ?
Did he make an obvious action?

Answer yes to any one of those and he is active and therefore offside

 

[stevoc]

I just don’t think it makes any difference at all. The errors have all been a factor of VAR not being fit for purpose and/or human error under pressure. The idea that, in the moment, the officials will take into account what various managers have and haven’t said in the weeks leading up to those few seconds just doesn’t hold water at all. And I, for one, am happy the club I support doesn’t get involved in the sort of hysterical nonsense we’ve seen from Arteta/Arsenal this week.

You might well be right mate, and I wholeheartedly agree with you about VAR in general.

Though I will say there's a difference between ETH calmly pointing out bad errors in post match interviews/conferences and the hysterical rantings of clowns like Arteta and embarrasing press releases. All I'm saying is for me it doesn't feel right that the manager isn't highlighting these errors in the same way SAF did for years.