The rules literally prove your opinion wrong. Likewise your opinion might be handballs should be allowed, and in the same way the rules say otherwise. It isn't relevant explaining why it should have been a penalty, as the only thing that counts is that the rules clearly explain why it wasn't.
He's still entitled to it... Tbh rules don't mean they're right anyway. Common sense is where I base my opinion from. I don't need rules.
It clearly isn't a contentious pen, it's clear why it was disallowed. Our claim was more contentious, with some pundits saying it could have gone either way, but still the decision to disallow ours was backed up by the rules too. This was why VAR was brought in, to provide clear reasoning and get rid of the grey areas. Opinions don't count here.
I said it was never a pen, but GG thinks it should be. I don't agree with him, but he's entitled to his opinion. The rules? I personally wouldn't wipe my arse on the rules... Get back to common sense and we wouldn’t even have to listen to sentences that include ' clear and obvious'
It was not an obvious error. The replay needed super slow motion to see the slight touch from the toe. That was NOT obvious.
As much as I appreciate your praise of my intellect, the fact remains it is not me who is responsible to explain this, it's the VAR adjudicator. Google "why were Newcastle not given a penalty against Arsenal".
The error was the fact the ref missed the contact with the ball mate.. Once it became clear he'd kicked the ball it became an obvious error.
I actually think it's because they were already getting loads of **** from Arteta and they thought **** that..
But it wasn’t obvious ffs it took minutes of replays and Slow motion to identify it. Oh man I give up. Whatever chaps keep seeing what you want too.
So just have one replay at full speed then, cos we should ignore anything that isn't immediately obvious?
