Coventry v Man Utd

This isn't true though. If Zenden's penalty had been disallowed because he touched it twice we might have still won the trophy. If Ehiogu's "handball" had been given as a penalty it might have been saved. However, if Festa's goal in the FA Cup final had stood we might have won a trophy many years earlier. I assume there were incorrect decisions in the run up to those and other finals, like against Chesterfield and all other competitions and there were things like Viduka not getting the penalty in the Sevilla game at 1-0 which could have changed things. There will have been other games where we were on the receiving end of bad decisions like Ronaldo's dive which might have meant we progressed further that year. They all happened under the system we had at the time and whether we liked it or not it was the way it was. That's not the case now. We don't have to wonder how things would have gone if the correct decisions were made instead because we have a system to correct it. It's not a perfect system but there are now fewer games decided by poor decisions than there used to be.

I spoke to a bloke from Chesterfield recently and he mentioned the goal against us. He's still talking about that one major refereeing decision nearly 20 years later that prevented his side from getting to their first FA Cup final. Would Diego Maradona be considered the best player of all time if his hand of God goal had been disallowed and they hadn't gone on to win the World Cup? Is it better that those things were allowed to stand so we could get on with the game immediately instead of taking a small amount of time to get it right?
We won because the ref ****ed up.
 
I didn't dodge it - I stated I have no idea how that match would have gone, and neither do you.

Would we have won the game if the maximum wage was still in place? What if modern goalkeeping gloves existed, would Schwarzer have kept hold of Davies' shot? What if Wembley hadn't been redeveloped, would we have broken our hoodoo? It's all academic as VAR didn't exist.



You keep arguing with an interpretation of what I've said, rather than what I've actually said.

My point:

VAR exists now and isn't going anywhere. When it is employed it should be used to enforce the laws of the game - as it was yesterday. It is not the fault of the system that Coventry's goal was offside and you were denied your nice story - it was the laws of the game that stopped that.
Our trophy was won by a refereeing error.
We don't know what would have happened if the goal had not been given absolutely.This doesn't alter the fact that the only trophy we ever won, is because Mike Riley didn't apply the laws properly. We don't know what would have happened had he correctly ruled out the penalty. We do know that the goal which won us the trophy should have been ruled out.

Does this lessen the win at all for you?

It doesn't for me because I feel that refereeing mistakes are part of the game. I've seen plenty of things go against us, so I'm happy to take things going for us.

What do you think?

Just because something exists it doesn't mean we should use it. Smallpox exists. Doesn't mean we should infect everyone with it.
 
Fine present your evidence that it evens out over the course of a season, I’ve got all night…….
It's logic Mart. Nobodies got it in for us.

This is where you post a link to some study or other done by UCL or some university somewhere.

I point out the study's shortcomings.

You say I'm being arrogant and refusing to accept FACTS.

There we go I've saved us some time. :D
 
It's logic Mart. Nobodies got it in for us.

This is where you post a link to some study or other done by UCL or some university somewhere.

I point out the study's shortcomings.

You say I'm being arrogant and refusing to accept FACTS.

There we go I've saved us some time. :D
It’s not logic there is no logic that over an any 12 month period the errors will not only even out but will also be of equal impact. Why does it even out over a season, why not over three games or 8 years?
 
Back
Top