don't think they are / can appealing but City have already said it is going to the Court for Arbitration in Sport - in fact they have already taken it there but the case was rejected as they had to let the EUFA action be completed first .
If you take into account quantum fluctuation and the uncertainty principle, you can never be 100% certain on measuring any objects in relation to each other. But you go on what you've got. It's still better that the human eye (unless it belongs to Sian Massey).
except we are relying on the human eye of some VT technician in a bunker somewhere in Surrey . PS the obvious answer is to clone Sian
If the FA had a spine they would strip them of last years. But they do not so I suspect we are to be docked 22 points for some arbitrary reason.
'Do you understand it?', asks Conor Coady, 'Well only after it is explained to me forensically' replies Des Kelly. And THAT is the problem with VAR: the captain of a prem club and a commentator on the game revel in their ignorance of the rules of the game, much as Steve Bruce labelled any ref who would have CORRECTLY disallowed the beachball goal at Sunderland those years ago as a 'Saddo'. Can anyone imagine coverage of American football, cricket or tennis being so happy to display their ignorance of the rules of the game they get paid to know? They whined for years for technology to end incorrect decisions - now they whine that technology is overturning incorrect decisions because they don't understand the rules of the game. Arseholes.
Well assuming they do not win the appeal, they have a lot of money so may offer a few envelopes in the right pockets, I suspect Pep will think it time for a move to PSG
I can't imagine that the language City have used in their statement - repeatedly calling the enquiry "prejudicial" and casting doubt on its independence - is likely to endear them to an appeals board.
This is the thing. They have been at war with UEFA for a while and have shown little remorse. They have constantly argued and even said they would happily get the best lawyers to take on UEFA.
The most impressive thing about this city cheating news is how JK and the team have utterly destroyed the cheating w@nkers this season.....spending peanuts versus their ridiculous money.
There's two issues with offsides for var currently. Firstly, the margin of error is larger than what some offsides are given as, so just saying 'offside is offside' simply isn't true for those incidents, as you cannot state for a fact that they were offside. See Pukki v Spurs or Firmino v Villa for examples. Secondly, and the bigger issue imo, is that it goes against what VAR was brought in for. It's supposed to be used for CLEAR AND OBVIOUS errors that should be clear almost immediately. Not to spend 3 minutes analysing multiple angles to see if somebody's toenail is a millimetre offside.
it’s becoming ridiculous. I don’t know what the solution is, whatever you do, if you leave it to the video analysis there will always be long delays as you just move the boundaries by a few inches and so move e borderline decisions by the same few inches. perhaps a self imposed timer - if it’s not clear and obvious in, say, 20 seconds, just play on?
Yeah I'm not one for inserting a 'margin of error' as it's just moving the problem to a different line. I've always advocated a 30 second time limit on all var decisions on the basis that if you can't come to a decision after 30 seconds, then it's quite clearly not clear and obvious. Talking offsides specifically then I'd make it naked eye only. Remove the lines across the pitch and have a maximum of two replays. If it's not obvious from that then stick with the onfield decision. Any hugely wrong offsides where an advantage has been gained are obvious almost immediately.
If City lose their appeal then the Prem will also have to take action. Perhaps reduce them down 2 leagues as happened to Rangers, or dock points, or remove their titles for the years they were cheating.