North Korea like? 
China 
1 Like
And he was a regular at their matches, so it wasnât just the usual âsupported my pub team since I was a nipperâ excuse.
1 Like
That only holds up until you watch the goal with open eyes, then you notice that Donnaruma has his head turned to looking to his right whilst Robbo is off to the left. If anyone is blocking his sight it is Doku, so they are raising walls around a ref making a fuck up to protect one of their own.
7 Likes
I donât blame the assistant and I donât blame Kavanagh. It was reasonable to think that since Robertson was ahead of everyone else, he was impeding the goalkeeper.
But that corrupt cunt named Michael Oliver had every camera at his disposal showing him that that wasnât the case and he still went ahead and disallowed it. He overruled clear evidence once again to favour his paymaster.
At what point and after how many crucial, City-favouring decisions will something be done about him?
6 Likes
Not sure ex pros are the answer looking at Punditry.
2 Likes
If the linesman is unsure he shouldnât raise his flag.
I think you can excuse Kav on this mind.
1 Like
6ft 5, Donnarumma couldnt see the ball because 5ft.10 Robbo was ducking down in front of him!
Incidentally Doku is 5ft 8!
Sky putting out articles saying that even after Webbâs comments, it still questionableâŚ
2 Likes
This is where the defenders of this decision are being so dishonest. The linesman rattled off a laundry list of reasons Robbo was offside, and people are using those other things to suggest the fact he was not actually in the keeperâs line of sight doesnt matter - the lino still thought there were other reasons he was impacting the keeper therefore it is still offside . But you cannot accept that interpretation once you see that the lino didnât actually have a good view of where Robbo was in relation to the goalie. Everything the lino said about how impactful his presence was and his movement has to be reevaluated in light of realizing the incident did not happen the way he thought it did. Like I said, this is a textbook use case for when VAR is supposed to interveneâŚit is not making an independent judgement to disagree with the lino but saying that the linoâs interpretation is by default not defensible seeing as the video evidence shows he did not see the situation correctly.
I dont know whether this is dishonesty and a reflex to circle the wagons (from people like Dale Johnson who has now moved to the BBC) or stupidity - the inability to do very basic logic puzzles. But I suspect its a combination of both when you consider the collective group of people defending this.
3 Likes
Yeah especially as ex pros have a significant presence on the IFAB board that write the laws that people have become so increasingly dissatisfied with.
2 Likes
Ex pro refs might go as far as calling them âlittle boysâ, and in the process, come across as bigger cunts than they already are.
2 Likes
Think of the advent of the premier league. Man United had a huge part in it.
Thereâs your answer
2 Likes
It can only be one of these two. Itâs crazy that with VAR technology they cant get the decision right, or maybe they did 
With VAR every now and then we are simply expected to believe something that our own eyes can see is simply not true.
3 Likes
I bet the refs hate it. It exposes them.
1 Like
Have you ever been speaking to someone you thought you knew pretty well and realized there is something they shockingly misunderstand that you had no idea about? Or even thought something you didnât think a functioning adult could think? Youâre in a conversation and all of a sudden find yourself realizing that someone has confused Nelson Mandela for Marvin Gaye?
That was how I felt after hearing Webbâs explanation of the Mac-Doku incident two years ago. What exactly do these people think a foul is?
3 Likes
Speaking of which, who was the ref in that WC final? De Jong didnât even get a card for this
3 Likes
Dermot Gallagher? Wasnât he a bit sympathetic to us?
1 Like