I think there’s a really vague bit that they published saying once the game has restarted they can’t go back and check check something unless it’s serious foul play/biting/spitting etc. However I think it’s a grey area as this wouldn't be classed as going back to check something. It would be going back to re-confirm a decision. I think this is where need to show the audio in line with pictures of what was happening. As you’d think when players lined up to take free kick they’d spot and call the ref then. But we’re var thinking job done and having a little chat, taking a mini relax and missed it? Can only assume play restarted and by the time var had realised what had happened, a minute or two had gone by and by then I guess they thought too much time had passed to bring it back and correct it?
I ask because I thought I heard that as a throw-away line amidst all the discussion afterwards. I've never heard of it but I'm sure there's a lot of fine print I'm unaware of in the ref's handbook. If not, then why didn't England speak up when the free kick was taken? "Hang on, Si -what's going on? It was a goal." It seems more stupidity than corruption, tbh - it's bound to be found out. As people have already said, it's as though he didn't even bother to check. I'm giving up speculating, it's all too bizarre.
I think they're only likely to release audio if it backs their story. Even then that wouldn't stop conspiracy theorists claiming they dubbed it in a studio later.
They had the show on sky where released the audio of other ones, mainly the Onana one v wolves so don’t see why wouldn't do this. It’s only way they’ll actually be able make sense of the explanation they have in the statement.
I'm aware of that show but I didn't see it. I was told that they basically cherry-picked incidents that they could adequately explain?
Think there was 4/5. A couple were bog standard boring ones with no real controversy but did do a couple - including the Onana one where they admitted they got the decision wrong (think that was one they apologised to wolves after the game?) so weren’t just the easy ones
Fair enough. The Onana one was subjective though, like most decisions. It's easy enough to get those wrong, or to come to a conclusion that others disagree with. I'm already over the Jones and Jota red cards, though I still believe they were both incorrect, because that is subjective and this happens all the time. It always will, regardless of VAR. The offside was clear, and isn't a matter of opinion, which is why this is still grating on me - I just can't see any valid excuse for it. The club is calling for transparency, and I think they're entitled to do that without being labelled as whingers. It's for the good of everyone in the long run, the tribalism it's provoked is sadly predictable.
Just a note on Gary Neville. This guy is one of the snakiest pundits on TV, and one of the reasons why I barely watch sky sports these days. He expressed (possibly faux) outrage over the Diaz decision, purposefully steering the conversation to highlight a perceived incorrect offside for utd vs Arsenal., before flip flopping about the Diaz fallout after liverpool's statement. Reminds me of the fallout from the ESL when Neville was was at pains to emphasise how Liverpool were the peoples club and should be the most ashamed by it "oh and man utd as well" he included as an afterthought before continuing to emphasise how liverpool should be the most ashamed.
To be honest, we don't need Klopp to call them out. What the club should do is be using the media to make sure we keep the pressure on them.
Precisely this. Offside is not subjective - it's binary. It's a simple 'Yes, he's offside, or no, he's onside'. This type of error should NOT be happening at all. And your last sentence is nail on the head. EVeryone had sympathy for us ... UNTIL we publicly complained. Surprise surprise - the media then changes the narrative. Look at the u-turn from Gary NEville for example.
Apparently that is the rule. But that all goes out the window when United were awarded a penalty after FT ...
So what would happen if a free kick was taken quickly, but VAR sees that the incident that led to it needs a review - do they just ignore a possible red card incident? Seems to me another example of a mash-up of old and new rules that are conflicting with one another due to the new technology. You'd have to either delay all free kicks whilst the ref checks with VAR for a possible review (which would slow the game down even further, and reduce advantage in some cases) or you make it so that VAR can call for it to be brought back for a serious error. Like a legitimate goal that got chalked off, say. No wonder the authorities see no problem with the standard of officials, given that the law-makers themselves display a similar level of incompetence.
I've seen a few people mention it now, can I ask when was a public apology issued? The statement released was an acknowledgement not an apology. Rival fans can make lists as long as they like about incorrect decisions, they happen to every club, there's no disputing that. We've all benefitted from and lost out on points due to incorrect decisions. The difference here is that the error is unprecedented. The excuse given just doesn't stack up. There are at least four people in the video review room, all supposed to be watching the game. It's very unlikely that none of them saw the offside flag and the non-celebration of the goal. There should be an independent inquiry and a complete review and overhaul of the entire VAR system. It doesn't look like it will be abolished any time soon (first choice), so the next best thing is to have an independent body run it, the old school tie approach is simply not fit for purpose. You can't have mates overseeing mates and expect fairness and a well run system. Btw what happened to the punishment of a yellow for waving an imaginary card? So far Macallister is the only player singled out. Funny that....
supposedly there is a law that states if the game is restarted you can't re-review anything. I am a little shocked (well maybe not, due to how incompetent our officials seem) that VAR didn't tell the ref they had messed up.
Just want to add because it's got lost in all the contentious decisions but I'm very impressed with how well the team played. Not one head went down at any stage, in fact the team grew and grew. We bettered Spurs with 11 men, 10 and 9 and kept fighting till the final whistle. Klopp deserves credit too for his calmness in the face of extreme adversity.
no we better spurs who had 12 men. with 11 we were really comfortable. with 10 we created chances and scored 2. with 9 we were making breaks to try win the game still. spurs were poor. even with 12men.
Hooper was useless and lost control of the game, he gave out 11 yellow cards and one straight red - but to some extent I think he's been made the fall-guy here. He gave Jones a yellow, which was fair, but England sent him to the monitor and carefully selected the images that would support a decision he (England) had already made. Hooper made a mistake with Jota's first, but then had no choice with the second, which was a yellow all day. The offside debacle is entirely down to the VAR room, of course.
You would expect them to overturn the Jones one purely as a gesture of goodwill. And I would expect several decisions to go our way over the next few games.
So the rules state that you can go back in the case of mistaken identity. There you go then, they mistook Diaz for someone who hadn't just scored a goal.
