Yes, exactly what I predicted you would say - willing to admit that referees "err", but never, never willing to agree with criticism of specific errors by individual referees.

I'm curious about your determination to keep using a word wrongly. Just stubbornness, I suppose - not a very attractive quality.

One of the so called benefits of 'VAR' was that it was supposed to remove the perceived bias towards the bigger teams in the event of contentious decisions; the reasoning being that the objectivity of VAR would remove doubt.
I can't claim VAR did or didn't achieve this aim yesterday.

However, I do think the standard of refereeing has deteriorated since the introduction of VAR, as well as spoiling the game as a spectacle.
Pre- VAR, for good or bad, the decision maker was clear as the referee was in sole control.
Now it's open to interpretation in many cases and the inconsistencies and controversies seem greater than ever.
There are divergences as to what constitutes handball, where lines should be drawn,whether there is interference in play and what is a foul.

At games the rhythm is continually disrupted with hold ups in play for VAR.
The spontaneity and excitement of the game can be ruined and feelings of injustice increased (think of Wolves at the wrong ebd of a number of critical decisions this season).

The only people who seem to benefit are the technology companies who seek to make continual inroads in their attempts to exploit the game and the broadcasters who are gleeful at the controversies.

As a final point, I don't believe VAR has eradicated bias towards the big clubs.
They continue to benefit from decisions from referees just has been the case since I started watching football over 50 years ago.

With the greatest of respect, some might deem certain specific decisions "Errors" whilst others view them in a more positive light, accordingly those in the latter cohort will not agree with the former.

Apropos "Stubborness" far more negative terms have been hurled in my direction,indeed my self-deprecation has allowed me to admit to my plethora of limitations.In the final analysis I am not the Patron Saint of self-righteousness.

I know what you think, or rather your stance Willo. I’ll write to the rest of the world and let them know football is an incorruptible sport, full of dignity and the upmost respect for the law. I should have done so when the World Cup was on in the great footballing nation of Qatar come to think of it. Both the tooth fairy and Santa had agreed to it but I was so busy correctly sorting my recycling and obeying speed limits.

Edited by Nicholas91 (10 Dec 2023 1.38pm)

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Yes, some may regard some decisions as erroneous, but you will never admit to a single specific refereeing decision discussed on this site as wrong - not a single one. Instead you hide behind the same predictable and irrelevant guff that referees are only human and can err - which is a shame because it adds nothing to the debate.

By the way, I have always - rightly or wrongly - agreed with you on one thing. I'd be astonished if corruption didn't exist in football, but, without any grounds for saying this, I simply don't accept that referees are corrupt. Sometimes incompetent yes, but that takes us back to the first point........

Interesting word that Willo is comfortable with. I can't find Ablomb in any dictionary. Could it be an abbreviation of a love bomb or love bombing, which means to influence someone by showing them attention or affection? In which case, does that describe Willo's attitude towards the wretched Madley and his illustrious predecessor, Mark Clusterf***?

The right place at the right time