The College Dropout

Murphy is contracted until 2027? WHAT? I tuned out during the latter days of Ashley.

It's going to make the relegation battle fun. Everton will need 44-46 points to stay up you imagine. That's not a given for them but they will get close. Edit: Tbh they might stay up with 40 (pre-points deduction). The others are way off the pace already.

I can only respect it if Chelse & City are hit with points deductions that stick.

I feel like it happens every time we have 2+ matches with bad results.

Fair enough, and I agree they should've probably gone with the onfield decision for both. There is one significant difference, though - the Hojlund one - Hojlund was on the ball, and the ref definitely saw it and decided it wasn't a penalty. That's fair. The City one was off the ball, and there's a chance the referee didn't see it at all. Therefore, it would be worth VAR asking, "Did you see the tug by Man U 11 on the City player? That might be a penalty." If the ref and linesman saw it and said - "yep- saw a minor tug.. not enough for a penalty", they should 100% move on. If no on-field ref saw it... it is worth a conversation/review IMO. Caveat: I don't remember the incident to know if it was a proper penalty or not. So it's not a like-for-like example, so consistency here doesn't apply - the use case is different. You're never going to get consis Again, I think audio should be shared in real-time so everyone can understand the process. I'm assuming all of the above; we don't actually know.

Fair enough, and I agree they should've probably gone with the onfield decision for both. There is one significant difference, though - the Hojlund one - Hojlund was on the ball, and the ref definitely saw it and decided it wasn't a penalty. That's fair. The City one was off the ball, and there's a chance the referee didn't see it at all. Therefore, it would be worth VAR asking, "Did you see the tug by Man U 11 on the City player? That might be a penalty." If the ref and linesman saw it and said - "yep- saw a minor tug.. not enough for a penalty", they should 100% move on. If no on-field ref saw it... it is worth a conversation/review IMO. Caveat: I don't remember the incident to know if it was a proper penalty or not. So it's not a like-for-like example, so consistency here doesn't apply - the use case is different. You're never going to get consis Again, I think audio should be shared in real-time so everyone can understand the process. I'm assuming all of the above; we don't actually know.

Would we have Howe if not for that? And would he be the same manager he is today?

Both of these... it was the onfield decision that was the final decision, right? If so, what's your problem? I agree on the nit-picking so we are on the same page. Offsides, blatant errors, whatever the handball rule is... fine. Anything else go with the onfield decision. By blatant I mean - was that a dive? Did the ref miss a definite trip (not a little bit of contact)?

I would change how it’s communicated in the stadium though. It’s such a weird and eery experience. And I would keep the bar high to reduce the amount of checks and increase the speed.

Well.. it’s less human error. In the professional world if you had something that reduced human error by 95% it would be widely celebrated. That Drogba goal was just one of those things that happened all the time. The Aguero goal was from a set piece where Aguero was standing in an offside position the ENTIRE time. It was the obvious thing to look for and it was still missed. I understand the enjoyment angle. But I’d still rather take the greater accuracy. I think Burns goal was initially marked as offside against PSG and I knew it wasn’t. So when the flag went up I was jumping around the house in giddy anticipation shouting ‘HES ON HES ON ITS A GOAL HES DEFFO ON ITS A GOAL’. That for me was exciting. Being 90% confident a goal wrongly rules off would be given.

Why ? Id like us to try it for a season. People going apeshit at the regularity of incorrect offside calls.

Fair enough. But the world has changed a bit in 150 years... we couldn't go back... so what's the answer going forward?

Do we really have to entertain the "Eddie is under pressure" narrative after every consecutive bad result?

The biggest issue is fans expect the 100% correct all the time even when it's subjective. Even with VAR sometimes things are missed. But that's totally unacceptable now. (and this is increasingly rare) And with VAR some things are subjective. If it doesn't fall your team's way - it's totally unacceptable. I personally like the high bar rule. Only interject in stonewall decisions. VAR gets too involved these days. Like if there's a bit of contact in the box but not a massive amount - go with the refs decision either way. Like the ref called for the City penalty against Chelsea. It was a bit soft but it can be given. That's fine. If he didn't give it... that's also fine.

I don't think it did. We just have bad memories. Aguero scored a goal against us from an indirect freekick where he was stood in an offside position the entire time. It wasn't even close. We lost the game 1-0 and City didn't create much else. We were then relegated by 1 point. Nobody remembers that because it was a routine mistake. People would have a fit and demand a rematch if this happened with VAR:

We have added them. They are still young and are on loan. IMO Gordon should be able to stand in at ST. He would need Barnes + a proper RW to flank him to succeed. Not Joelinton & Matt Ritchie.

I can only think of Forest and Liverpool. City have 1 (Haaland) . Arsenal have 2 (Jesus, Nketiah). Man U have 2 (Hojlund, Martial). We have 2. Liverpool have many. Brighton have 2 (Welbeck, Ferguson). Villa have 2 (Watkins, the new lad). Brentford have 2 (Toney, Wissa). West Ham have 1 (Antonio). As mentioned.. our problem is both our strikers keep getting injuries and we don't have a decent 3rd route yet. We are better stocked at CF than Villa, Arsenal or Man Utd IMO. It's just that Watkins doesn't get injured.

Gordon is almost 7 years younger though. Sterling will be out of the way over the next 3-4 years you expect. Sterling will be pushing 32 by the next World Cup. If a 25-year old Gordon isn't ahead of them by that point he's not England quality. There's not a glut of players within 3-4 years of Gordon that are miles ahead of him. Southgate and the Euros might come too soon for him.

tbf Forest is one of the league's worst examples of squad building. Awoniyi, Origi & Wood. I like Awoniyi lad but the others? Nope.

This is surely a bluff. Southgate will be out soon. Sterling is getting on. Rashford is having a nightmare and is prone to them.

For us it's both. Lots of pressing. And lots of chasing balls and fighting defenders. You look at Haaland. Sketchy injury record at Dortmund. Moves to City - still has to press. But his minutes are smartly managed. And he's not chasing 50/50 balls all day in isolation. Our strikers have to play a bit like Michail Antonio and actually score goals.

Wood is also 3rd or 4th choice at Forest

Every time he gets injured - replace him 3 bad games on the bounce - replace him No respect for a player with more league goals than Marcus Rashford, Ollie Watkins, Darwin Nunez, Dom Solanke, Evan Ferguson, Gabriel Jesus, Eddie Nketiah, Diogo Jota, Calvert-Lewin, Nicholas Jackson, Nkunku, Richarlison. Fucking Cameron Archer cost £25m. Gabby Jesus £45m. Nunez £80m. Rasmus Hojlund £80m. But aye us with glaring holes in the squad and FFP limitations. Let’s easily replace Callum Wilson. edit: 25 goals in 41 league appearances- many off the bench - since the start of last season. Only bettered by Haaland and Kane. Put some respect on his name please. Get better quickly lad.

"Replace him in the summer". It's not easy to replace a 15-goal-a-season PL striker.

I think this happened to the Chelsea left-back. They rested him for two months. He came back... played once or twice. The problem came back. He missed the rest of the season after surgery.