Should Arsenal’s first goal against Manchester United have stood? Cast your vote here!

VAR has been in the headlines a lot recently, unfortunately for the wrong reasons.

The decision to rule out West Ham’s equaliser against Chelsea was absolutely ridiculous, and again at Old Trafford yesterday, I predicted that a VAR decision would go against us…

In the 13th minute, Odegaard dispossessed Christian Eriksen on the halfway line, Arsenal broke at speed and then Martinelli scored a fantastic goal.

Bruno Fernandes moaned like a little girl (like he usually does) and the referee took a look at VAR.

And we all know what happened next.

Paul Tierney went over to the monitor, “reviewed” the incident and then ruled the goal out for a foul on Eriksen.

Are you kidding me?

Before any Manchester United fans come at me, yes, there was contact. But is football a non-contact sport now?! The decision was absolutely ridiculous and I defy anyone to argue that Eriksen didn’t go down easily – and if you look at the footage closely, he actually starts to fall before Odegaard’s knee connects with him.

The decision was ludicrous, and it completely changed the game.

With Arsenal in the lead, Manchester United wouldn’t have been able to sit back and get us on the counter attack. You can say whatever you want about Arteta’s tactics and how the team was setup, but the first goal always shapes how the game goes and I have no doubt with United having to open up, we would have gone on to score 2 or even 3 goals and win that game.

Small decisions make big impacts and the referees and VAR need to get their act together because the spirit of the game is being ruined.

But did you think Arsenal’s goal should have stood? Cast your vote below and leave your thoughts in the comments section!


18 thoughts on “Should Arsenal’s first goal against Manchester United have stood? Cast your vote here!

  1. Seriously,would the sad b’Stard manure fans who come on here just f** k off to your own pathetic blogs.If you want to know what proper fouling is on a very regular,embarrassment,just watch your own McTominay lol!

  2. We can’t let ourselves get tied up in knots about it. It could have gone either way and it went against us. Others this season will go in our favour.
    Focus on being top of the league and putting in a strong performance despite ultimately losing the game.

    • Football, fundamentally, is a contact sport: to outlaw, primarily, fair contact would render the “sport” farcical. A fair contact challenge, for a free ball, within the rules, should be expected, and obvious, and within the referee’s remit and professional scope to interpret.
      There is no place for dangerous physical contact. This is fundamentally obvious, and if a referee is unable to make a correct call he / she is in the wrong job!
      There is no place for other forms of foul play whether physical; verbal; racial; just apply the rules!
      Malicious unsporting foul contact cannot be tolerated; particularly where the obvious, direct, aim of the offender is not to gain control of the ball, but to deny the opponent a fair opportunity to gain such control.
      Examples would include:-
      1/ physically blocking an opponent free and fair passage over the field of play when the offender is not playing, or not intending to play the ball, but physically shielding out the free passage of the opponent: this includes such as; tripping; holding; pushing; kicking; deflecting; punching; spitting.
      2/ ANY holding, and, particularly, wrapping arms around the opponent, pulling shorts /shirts, and all such unsporting contact, in any part of the field of play, not least in the penalty or goal area at free kicks and corners! The object of the game is “football” after all and NOT “strictly come dancing” !
      VAR is there to draw attention to obvious error and oversight that referee and assistants might have missed! If the referee and assistants have had first hand visual assessment of the incident he / she /they should be up to the job and deliver his /her /their verdict without subjective interference from the remote operator of the VAR system! if the field officials are assessed not to be up to the job by later analysis of on the field officiating actions and performances they should be demoted from future involvement until any reassessment finds the official to be fit to serve.
      A toe; or a hip; or a finger; or a forehead determined to be a couple of inches beyond an artificial VAR digital line to signal “offside” and overturn a perfectly valid run of play whether or not this should result in a goal; clearance; or other physical turn of play; is total farce! In the highest percentage of incidents this is a spoiler to the natural progress of a game! More so it is so very often subjective and open to incorrect interpretation by a third party who is not on the field of play and thereby remote from the action.
      Lets get football back to sporting sensibility promoting an overall concept of fair play, eliminating bias and subjectivity under the banner of objective professional officiating !

      Old Sooner


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.