Yes. Anyone in their right mind would. The only penalty claim that wasn't contentious was the handball. Had it been given correctly, then everything that follows changes. Are you honestly suggesting the game would've played out exactly the same? The mere fact that Bayern would've taken a penalty makes the very next event different ffs I appreciate fans can become rose tinted about their clubs but this is delusional beyond belief. I'm amazed you're even arguing the point lol
You still think something impossible to know or prove is a fact. You might as well tell us what happens when you time travel and change the past too. Jeepers. Credibility shot.
"everything that follows changes" is what you typed. Now you've shifted the goalposts to the single next event instead of everything yup?
Are you for real. If the very next event changes i.e. a penalty to Bayern then every event that follows changes. I'm amazed you fail to grasp this simple concept. Are you trying to rewrite quantum physics? I have to say I do miss these delusions from gooners. Where reason goes completely out the window lol
Fair enough although in my defence I really couldn't think of any other way of expressing it. But duly noted
Talking up one particular incident whilst simultaneously ignoring the others is selective at best. You’re speculating based on what YOU think would happen if X decision was given and then extrapolating from that. I’m not buying it I’m afraid. Regardless of whether you think the referee messed up or not, the penalty incident with Gabriel isn’t totally black and white, as we’ve seen and heard from analysts throughout the day. I can provide more sources if you want, but I suspect you’re just going to dismiss them anyway, so not sure what the point is.
Mate I'll take you back to what you posted - "Then we’re even for penalty incidents then" My response was not really, because had the first pen been given it changes the game i.e. all things subsequent to that pen change so no Saka pen claim. I've said in most of my replies to you that's the point. You may think that's talking up one incident, but it comes first so naturally it matters more as all things follow from that. So in answer to what you posted, it's not even at all. Had it been the other way around I'd be saying the same for Arsenal, and I dare say you would be too.
That was before I found out Tuchel was - possibly - being untruthful. Ultimately, I don't actually know anymore because no-one's come out to clear anything up. But obviously, when new information comes to light that changes things. Even if I were to accept this to be true, you assumed Kane would have scored the second penalty to make it 3-1. Granted, his record from the spot is very good, but it's not perfect. And it's totally not unlike him to score and miss in one game... Also, calling a flagrant elbow to Gabriel's jaw, when he's looked around and saw where he was, as a 'subjective decision' is extremely disingenuous. He should have been off. Kane has this reputation of 'not being that sort of player' when he can be very dirty. It's not the first time he's done something like this, either. Nonetheless, this would have changed the complexion of the game too and for whatever reason, you're choosing to not acknowledge this. Look, if you think you know what future outcomes would have transpired had all these decisions been given, that's up to you. But as far as I'm aware, you're not a fortune teller and it's all academic at this point. You can carry on maintaining this line of argument if you want, but like I said, it's immaterial to me because you're picking and choosing what suits your perspective.
I've not assumed Kane would've scored the penalty. I even said in an earlier post which I think was the one you quoted that they may or may not have scored. That is immaterial. The fact a penalty is awarded and happens means everything that follows changes. My response and my point (and I don't know how many times I can repeat this ) was in response to the Saka penalty claim and the fact Bayern had one earlier. Both penalty claims. I've not mentioned what future events would've transpired had all decisions been given, I've only referenced one - namely the Bayern penalty and that all subsequent events would've changed had they been awarded theirs. That's not firtune telling mate, that's just a fact. Do you disagree with this? Tbf it's only you that's brought other decisions into it. We could micro-analyse every decision as a form of tedious or contentious whataboutery but that would seem ridiculous. I'd have exactly the same position if Arsenal had, had that handball pen claim first. So once again, not even at all.
@Treble is logically correct. Any changed decision affects the position of the ball and the players and so everything else changes at least until half time. I think you have to assume the second half changes too because the team talks will be different as the play will have been different. I don't see this as in any way controversial...in fact it's the main reason I support VAR as I want as few mistakes as possible affecting the outcome.
I'll pick you up on this. The Vardy Special was actually quite unique and remarkably skilled, to the extent that I haven't seen a PL striker do it since they went down. Vardy did this thing where he would tuck the defender's arm under his own armpit and make it as if he was being pulled back. He would then fling himself to the floor but at such an angle and spin that it looked like he'd been hauled down, a remarkably difficult feat considering he'd be running full pelt in the opposite direction at the time. I recall a few penalties given against us where he did this. The best was probably the one against Sanchez in their 2-4 defeat. Saka is bad but Vardy was a different level.
In 2016-17, Lesta "Huth-ball" was effectively outlawed (which I assume is part of the reason that the 2015-16 fairy tale was not close to being repeated) . Similarly in recent memory I cannot recall seeing reams of Vardy controversy (not that I was a Lesta watcher) , so I assume VAR finally did for him.
