Man Utd 1-1 LCFC - Post Match Thread

[UniFox21]

So Ref Watch decided McTominay should've been sent off, and Maddison's goal should've been ruled out 

[chrishlcfc]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/18164723/cristiano-ronaldo-not-play-expensive/

 

Trying to work out whether I’m just really horrible or not by laughing my head off at this. Should take him to watch Yeovil play instead I reckon being from Somerset.  

[cityfanlee23]

On 04/04/2022 at 10:46, 5waller5 said:

 

At the point in time the push takes place Kel’s foot is extended trying to kick the ball.

 

push = foul

 

Result of foul is distortion of body shape, Kel’s foot follows his body and gets tangled with the defender’s foot.

 

foul not given, advantage played.

 

goal stands. 

 

 

 

 

If you really genuinely believe that the hook was a result of being pushed then I'm never going to get those blue tinted specs off you. Sorry for late reply just seen this. But done with the conversation to be honest. Agree to disagree, but you're definitely seeing things only a Leicester fan would see in this situation. 

[cityfanlee23]

On 04/04/2022 at 09:16, st albans fox said:

 

I think you’re wrong 

clear and obvious is where 90% of people  agree.  Of course those being asked would have to understand what constitutes foul play but var should only overturn on field calls for howlers and a howler is where 90% of people would agree.  The varane/kel battle on Saturday would probably fall into the 65/35 it’s a foul.  That’s not a basis for overturning  on field call in a situation where the incident doesn’t not lead directly to the goal. Rodgers is right to point out that there is another challenge before the pass to the scorer.  
I spoke to several people down here yesterday at the kids game and no one thought it was an overturn.  Is it a foul ?  Probably (on the basis above of 65/35)  - is it a clear and obvious error not to award the foul ? Most definitely not.   And that’s without taking into account that it doesn’t lead directly to the goal. 
 

and I’m not one who would jump up and down about the MCT not being a red. to me, that a refs call either way. what annoys me about that is the apparent ‘consequence rule’ which would mean that if madders shin had been smashed in half, he would have been red carded by mariner. 
 

var has the incorrect approach to goals. It asks ‘what can I find to rule out this goal’. it’s coming at it from the wrong angle. 
 

 

I mean, your entire argument is based on made up numbers...