Only if the average person on benefits employed a finance director to look after their money.
-
You can't call them that any more, Jim.
-
I don't think the dog bothering nonces have covered themselves in glory again at Spurs tonight.
-
Only Liverpool though…
-
I watched the game, and for me the standard of officiating totally ruined the game. There were some inexplicable decisions that fundamentally changed the nature of it, and once again referee+VAR have conspired to get a really easy decision wrong.
-
…and now PGMOL have admitted that when they claimed they’d done a VAR check on the offside goal, they actually hadn’t (or hadn’t done it properly at least). This might be Howard Webb resignation territory.
-
He's the good one. Apparently. Wouldn't his resignation mean that we have to have a worse one in charge?
Start sacking incompetent referees. I was really buoyed when there was talk of the Saudis buying them from us. We could replace them with championship officials, who still know how to make decisions.
At least until Webb and his cronies break them.
-
The VAR official today is due to be the 4th official with us tomorrow.
-
Maybe he's better at keeping coaches in a box, than he is at watching the telly in one?
-
That offside decision was weird. Even without the lines he looks on, and clearly with the lines he is.
I don't know why Liverpool fans are up in arms about the straight red though. You lose control in a challenge and put your studs into an opponent's shin then you're going to be off and it's not really debatable.
-
The analysis post game was along lines of it is a red but the rules are wrong.
The other red, the first yellow looked pretty dodgy. But he was stupid to get a second yellow straight after pretty much.
Those decisions have some subjectivity to them.
The offside is just plain wrong and how a fully trained professional referee looks at the replay and decides it's not worth further review/line drawing is what we need to have explained!
-
Am now reading that the check was quick etc because the VAR guy thought it had been given as onside by the linesman so had a quick look, it obviously was onside and said check complete expecting a goal to be awarded.
If true i still don't see how when a goal wasn't given he didn't immediately say something to the red and correct the error!
-
In all of this don't lose sight of the fact that the interpretations of the laws of the game, have been turned into really shit ones that fundamentally change the game for the worse, so that these pricks can get them 'correct' easier.
-
This is a project to measure poetry. Unfortunately there isn't the time to put their calipers on every word, of every stanza. So instead they restrict themselves to the words adjacent to the punctuation, and pronounce upon it's greatness based on that.
They are a scourge to all that is beautiful about the game.
-
I think you’re right… any tackle that looks like that is going to result in a red. But I get why people don’t think it should be. There was no intent, it wasn’t reckless, he tried to go in fairly and just ‘slipped’ over the ball. We’re all used to a straight red being the penalty for deliberate/reckless fouls, and it always seems harsh when it’s really just a bit of bad luck/timing and refs don’t have much option but to treat it like a deliberate studs-in foul. It feels like we’ve just evolved into this interpretation without anyone sitting down and deciding that, in effect, it’s an automatic red for any foul where the studs are off the ground.
-
Because you're required to be in control when initiating contact, and to do it fairly, and if you don't then it's reckless. It's not just football, this is a common theme across many sports - for example in ice hockey if your stick catches someone in the face it's a penalty for high sticking regardless of how it happened, how accidental it was, or even if it was caused by an opponent.
The responsibility to not injure another player lies with you.
