BastardsKudus.
Bummer he didn't sign for us instead.
BastardsKudus.
Bummer he didn't sign for us instead.
The point is I didn't get to turn off the TV before Rio started flapping his jaws (so that's very much on me) he opened with the same, 'i can't believe they didn't even review it'.Christ talk about tiresome - you knew very well what I meant
We all know it was reviewed, so why say that? why perpetuate the chaos that swirls around VAR, to the wider audience?
A contentious decision is the penalty area - that's VAR's job.I haven't seen it, so forgive me - how do you know it was reviewed, did they say so?
His defensive game seems to have gone up a notch now that he has no Caicedo to rely on.Mac Alister is running this game.
Far far worse I thought. I didn’t have sound as watching on phone while wife watching tv. That was ankle breaker.Another tackle worse than Dahoud’s red being ignored by VAR in the Liverpool v Muff game.
I agree with this 100%. It was absolutely stone wall pen. Shocking from officials to miss it.Bowen should have had a penalty at the end. Both arms round the waist and rugby tackling is not "a 50-50 tussle".
Congrats. As an occasional and ineffectual gambler, why are PP offering separate odds like that and allowing you to combine them when the bets are hardly distinct from one another? Is this the bookies offering arbitrage?
Now 0-3, definitely game over.Now 0-2. suggests game over?
How on earth are West Ham 6th? They’re a horrible watch. They spend massive money, massive wages and yet they still play dirgeball,
Quite. I don't know if it is a failing of VAR or the fans. It was a feature of all the articles when it was introduced, and it has been repeated many times, that VAR are constantly reveiwing things that fall in their remit (goals, penalties, red cards, mistaken identity). So fans should know. But then they also dcided that they would flash up on the screen when a review is happening, but this only happens if games are stopped and the review goes on for a long enough time for someone to say 'put it on the screen'. Which results in this mistaken belief that if it's not shown on the screen or there isn't a clear stoppage then they must have not reviewed it.A contentious decision is the penalty area - that's VAR's job.
If it wasn't and I'm wrong then c'est la vie, apologies all round.
Ok, so we have no idea. They should have, but sometimes they don't. Unless play stopped and then continued soon after, in which case, they probably didn't.A contentious decision is the penalty area - that's VAR's job.
Absolutely.Quite. I don't know if it is a failing of VAR or the fans. It was a feature of all the articles when it was introduced, and it has been repeated many times, that VAR are constantly reveiwing things that fall in their remit (goals, penalties, red cards, mistaken identity). So fans should know. But then they also dcided that they would flash up on the screen when a review is happening, but this only happens if games are stopped and the review goes on for a long enough time for someone to say 'put it on the screen'. Which results in this mistaken belief that if it's not shown on the screen or there isn't a clear stoppage then they must have not reviewed it.
I'm inclined to believe it was reviewed and that the VAR didn't see it as a clear and obvious error. One of those 'wouldn't have overturned it if given, either' situations.
But given some of the process failures - (line on the wrong defender in ourt game v palace last year, the offside in that Liverpool game v Spurs) I wouldn't rule out them not doing their jobs properly.