Anyone know the timescales

Thanks for the responses

I’m now very worried reading them given the the general consensus is it won’t get overturned

I’m of the opinion it should not only be overturned but an apology should also be given to the club

Theres been quite a bit of noise, most ex pro pundits have said that doesnt deserve a red. playing with 10 men for 40 mins was harsh enough etc .

Though ofc it was Tierney on VAR and they will want to protect him again. Another shocking decision by this ref thats gone against Liverpool, if they overturn it theyll prob feel like it proves a point, so i can't see them doing it.

We've appealed

It's down to whether the refs will admit to yet another VAR mess up in such a short period of time

By an official who has big history with decisions against Klopps Liverpool, who is from Manchester... No chance they'll overturn it even though they know it was wrong.

https://twitter.com/footballdaily/status/1693577667931476349?s=46

Stephen Warnock spot on. What the fack is Paul Tierney’s problem. Get him off all of our games he’s a disgrace.

It won't be overturned.

There is enough in the appearance of the challenge for them to say it's not a clear error. It is but I think there's just enough for them to hide behind.

Yeah like everyone I can see it's not a red card. However there is no way it gets overturned, for the same reason VAR was never going to overturn it and whilst we have this 'clear and obvious' line they hide behind, this will remain the case in such challenges.

this clear and obvious error requirement is a clear and obvious face-saving opt-out for the pgmol.
it's basis is a complete fallacy.. it doesn't matter if a decision is a clear and obvious error, or a miniscule and easily missable infringement..
if it was wrong, it was wrong.. var should be able to correct it. var certainly shouldn't be getting it even more wrong than the ref did.
maybe it's time to start removing the human element from the decision making and start handing it over to an automated, rule based system (not AI), at least then, even if it does get something wrong, it'll be consistent about it, and fixable.

Well what do we know 🤣

comment by 20th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 19 hours, 5 minutes ago
this clear and obvious error requirement is a clear and obvious face-saving opt-out for the pgmol.
it's basis is a complete fallacy.. it doesn't matter if a decision is a clear and obvious error, or a miniscule and easily missable infringement..
if it was wrong, it was wrong.. var should be able to correct it. var certainly shouldn't be getting it even more wrong than the ref did.
maybe it's time to start removing the human element from the decision making and start handing it over to an automated, rule based system (not AI), at least then, even if it does get something wrong, it'll be consistent about it, and fixable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it was meant to stop two referees seeing the same subjective incident and having different views, however it's being used as if it's not an out right mistake, don't question the original decision.

I think if you remove that wording and the VAR has an opinion on a subjective decision which is different to the referee, then call him to the monitor. If it's a clear mistake, tell him to reverse his decision. Simple.