I think most people on here acknowledge bad decisions - no matter who they're against. Even if we do have a laugh depending on who the victim is. Irritating prick though he is, I sympathised with Mourinho up to a point when the Chavs decided not to play for him. Totally unprofessional.
Why is it whataboutry to point out that this level of fuss was not made by Liverpool FC when Wolves suffered exactly the same thing against them 9 months ago?
On a side note - what's all this business about lending refs to the A-rabs about anyway? Since when did we get a few guest refs at our games? If they thought they'd take them over to show them how it's done they'll be in for a rude awakening.
Because that would be up to Wolves to do it? If you think the game is run professionally and adequately then fine - otherwise you should applaud the fact that someone is willing to take them to task for their incompetence. Or is childish tribalism more important than a fair contest?
So Liverpool FC and the fans acted with childish tribalism instead of being interested in a fair contest when it came to the wolves game? The reason I don't support Liverpools respons is summed up in your response...you did not give a **** as a fan base when you got lucky but now ignore your then apathy while slagging others off for doing exactly what you did. We've had ridiculous decisions go against us... vertongen having a goal ruled as being offside when he was in his own half springs to mind. The Pedro mendes old Trafford goal. The ball bouncing of Sissokos knee onto his arm pit leading to a penalty in the CL final ... I could go on. We have also benefited from awful decisions. Every club could say the same and give valid examples. If pool fans didn't give a **** about those outrageous decisions that effected other team then why should anyone else give a **** when it happens to you?
why is it up to us to do it? being accused of being "dangerous" by a person who actively encouraged and applauded a literal riot and trespass on old Trafford. why should we try to highlight thst var should do better them none of these so called fans seem to care they get robbed blind weekly.
i couldn't care less if fans of other clubs "support" us but i think it is important to find out what actually happened as i'm still having difficulty believing anyone is as incompetent as PGMOL are suggesting and anyway if we must have VAR (and you know full well my views on that ) we could at least try and make it not so awful .
How do you know whether or not I give a ****? Don't presume to tell me what I think. It wasn't a subjective decision that I disagree with - it was a clear factual error that just should not be happening, and needs highlighting to try to prevent those things from happening again, something that we all will benefit from. If you're blinded by your tribal prejudices then that's your problem, reasonable people can see a reasonable course of action, regardless of who takes it.
Audio released. As assumed, they just gone done ****ed up. They need to change their protocol to ensure that ‘check complete’ isn’t the final word used. Check complete - goal awarded. check complete - offside no goal. Add 2 simple words on the end and issues solved. I’ll email pgmol and ask for 100k consultation fee.
All those decisions are pre var so every single team will have had **** ups. Every team will have had **** ups in var as well over numerous subjective decisions (heck could say offside wasn’t even worse decision as Jota first yellow was an even shorter decision). But this isn’t comparable as it’s not a subjective decision, they did the check, got the right decision then just miss communicated it. So yes, this needs to be raised to ensure something like that doesn’t happen again
The only thing that doesn’t make sense is this bit. VAR: Check complete, check complete. That's fine, perfect (showing Diaz is clearly onside). Off. Why the word off? That suggests that he’s confirming that diaz was offside?
that's the smoking gun. that's all it can refer to unless they say off at the end of every conversation
Rugby players are no angels but they do respect the ref by and large. A different culture I guess. They aren't entitled multi millionaires either.
Not sure what this means either: Is the first highlighted part referring to Romero playing him on? If so, what does the second part mean?
Yeah - I didn't mean that they're really innocent, just that the culture of the game doesn't allow them to scream abuse at the ref so that won't get picked up by the mics.
