By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
He’s been pretty consistent tbh taking them from L2 to one pen away from the PL and the worst ever VAR decision from the greatest ever FA Cup shock and a place in the final.
This is a great idea and realistically the only way to fix VAR.
I worry though that VARDV might also make mistakes.
To be on the safe side, they should prob introduce VARDVDV at the same time.
I mean, on reflection, really it might be best to do away with the actual players and the ball completely and just bring in VARdecides-result (VARDR) and then you’d only need Garth Crooks to run it, the season could be sorted in late August and we’d all save ourselves a lot of money and stress.
I was sitting in the Chapel looking straight down a line between the two penalty spots and the left-right-left-right-left-right was unbelievable.
None of the wingers making an effort to take on their defenders, absolutely no off the ball movement and no attempts at clever through balls.
In short absolutely zero attacking threat.
That changed a little when Tall Paull and Diaz came on, but only because they were fresh I think.
And I've got little time for Sullemana but at least his jockeying of the defenders and his feint that he might actually try to take them on, opened up the change of the ball to Bree.
I remember being in the same stand watching a late season Puel game against, I think, Man U - just the same sense of watching paint dry.
We don't believe in large scale conspiracies because, as franniesTache succinctly explained, we know that the world is too complicated, random and unfair for a conspiracy of any more than let's say a dozen people to survive contact with the world for more than a few days.
So it is pretty binary. You either believe in impossible things or you don't.
A bit like those with fundamentalist religious believes, there is also an element of conspiracy theory thinking that always has an answer to any counter-evidence. Pure Popperian unfalsifiability. Jelly, for example, will dismiss those talking in the link as undoubtedly in the pay of the lizards.
There's no point swapping a manager for someone worse but this shouldn't drive the decision to stick or twist with the current manager.
Rarely (if ever) is a current manager sacked just because the board think that there is someone better out there. If performances are OK, they are going to stick with what they have. That's just how it works.
So it should work the other way too, if a manager is failing, the fact that someone else might fail too shouldn't be reason to stick with the failing manager. He should be sacked and then it's up to the board to find someone better.
Granted this board has a poor recent track record of appointments but I don't think that matters. We can only hope that they will do better next time and if they don't then the new one can go too.
'messing with' doesn't have to equate to a foul in this context. And I nearly typed 'interfering with' the keeper but that has other connotations.
The trouble with your proposed solution, pragmatic though it is, is that it would mean that goals would be chalked off because of offside players who were nowhere near the play. And ffs VAR is getting enough kicks out of ruling out good gaols as it is.
In this case, I'd say if the linesman flags it's not a goal and if he doesn't it is. I know it's a crazy idea and God knows how it would work in practice...oh wait...
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
