A Man Utd fan happy that Liverpool won and went above them? Oh, dear. Isak got a 2nd at 1-0 that was ruled offside, too. Utter bullshit. please log in to view this image **** picture, but I'm struggling to find a decent one. Far more onside than Rashford, for example.
The BBC report of the VARpool match failed to mention the mysterious added on time at all, just that the goal happened in the last few seconds. It also failed to mention the second "offside" goal for Newcastle. Anyone reading the report might think there wasn't any controversy! In the comments section there were also many comments about Newcastle timewasting throughout. OK that may be the case, but how often is all that time actually added on? I understand that Everton were timewasting throughout the match the day before, but only three minutes were added on in that match (of which slightly less was actually played!) But guess what? All this discussion is irrelevant because the amount of time for extra time was already determined to be 5 minutes .... 5 minutes plus anything else that happened in extra time, not what happened in the rest of the match. And we also know from experience that only very rarely does extra time itself get extended at all, let alone for nearly three minutes more! So the only discussion should be what happened in extra time that caused all that extra extra time, not what happened before that. And I understand there was only one incident in which Pope went down. Was he timewasting? Irrelevant because he didn't take three minutes about it. So the ref should explain where all that extra time came from. But we know don't we, Fergie time becomes Klopp time. It's happened before. For example a couple of seasons back when the Alisson scored a "winner" in the 95th, wasn't that goal after when the match should have ended?
I don't know the rights and wrongs of this game but surely an independent timekeeper should be considered or at least some clarity as to how these decisions are made. For example in the Spurs game VAR took 4 1/2 minutes to make a decision. 4 minutes were added on. That's clearly wrong. Time wasting is an issue because teams know that the time they waste is not accounted for in any scientific manner. You will never get the time adjusted to the second because the time wasting requires a subjective decision but I think you could improve it by using a clock that stopped as substitutes were introduced and medics were on the field and of course VAR sorted out it's opinions.
The fact the match was on BT does have to be taken into consideration, since all too often matches on Sky or BT have 5-6 minutes of stoppage time as standard when non-televised matches have 4 maximum Not that I'm suggesting officials are under instruction to give broadcasters their money's worth...
I don't think that kind of stance is going to get anywhere. For a start it's just speculation and it's not likely to be taken seriously. I think you have to stick to the obvious because that's more difficult to deny. That's why I picked VAR, medics and subs. because it is possible to time these precisely. If you show that these are not being calculated correctly you have a chance of making your point.
When the amount of added time is already stated, yet the match continues way past that, it does become suspicious Obviously there's time where it wouldn't be, for example a player needing treatment after the stoppage time is announced, but when the match arbitrarily keeps going questions need to be asked - especially when any mention of this is swept under the carpet
Fulham are close to signing Carlos Vinicius for £4.3 million, is this the same Vinicius who Benfica wanted £42 million for a year ago
In Test match cricket, the 90 overs are never completed by 6pm as required. So half an hour is added to try to get them in. But that’s rarely enough. So rather than play until it’s dark, the authorities have decided to accept that 90 overs means 85 or 86, if you’re lucky. Football seems to be following a similar route. We can’t add on the actual time attributable to all the many stoppages or we’d be here all night is the thinking. So games go short. If you do get a long stoppage for injury of VAR, just accept that it’s going to take some time out of the game. As with cricket, the policy will actually just encourage more prevarication and time wasting by the team who will benefit from that.
In the past we haven't had that someone to switch the clock on/off. Ref is too busy and 4th official is 'running ' about on the touchline. But now we have VAR officials. They could do this 'difficult' task. (but are they independent- last night I'm not sure they were)
Great news is Alonso is going to Barca but the absolute kick to the nuts ,Aboomerang is coming back to the prem according to Fab Romano
I thought playing until a certain team got the winner had stopped with the retirement of a certain manager who now sits in the stands!?
Not too interested in deadline day, but had a quick look at the BBC page just now (16:31) and it seems to consist of stories of players who won't be joining Chelsea despite multi £million bids. Could be lazy journalism of course, could be Chelsea's attempt to reduce the effectiveness of other teams by buying every player in the world (to misquote a Who song, "see the new Chelsea just like the old Chelsea"). I thought only state owned clubs had unlimited budgets?
When the added on time board is held up they say it "there will be a minimum of X minutes"...tbh I have no issue with refs adding on the additional time...I just wish more would do it. Pretty certain our winner v Leicester last February was beyond the time added. Has happened other times too. We have complained a lot about teams time wasting from minute 1 against us (Watford, Burnley, WBA etc) and the biggest complaint was that they weren't punished with bookings and lots of added on time. Newcastle were wasting time from early on, Everton are regularly doing it...maybe this will stop it. Got no sympathy with Newcastle tbh
The ref got 5 minutes from 45 and then 3 from that 5, though. We all know damn well that were Liverpool leading at Anfield and Newcastle chasing it wouldn't happen.
