80

He was basically Shelvey minus the Howe factor. I feel a bit sorry for him as his career would've probably finished better with another 18 months here, but it was his own choice to leave it turns out.

He's just a nice, not very bright, emotionally unstable, introverted lad who loves football. There's really not much more to it than that. By his own admission. No need to get too upset or develop any grand theories about his motivations.

His injury record now is pretty shocking. I'm not sure he's been fully fit since September now has he? Despite multiple comebacks.

Yeah, definitely, it would imply players across the pitch having to be watchful of a traditional offside trap. That's part of why the newer interpretations were brought in, to make things more fluid. It's a judgement call, but personally I prefer not having this much confusion about exactly what the rules are, though. Particularly when VAR is factored in. And I think things like Longstaff would happen less by definition because last night he would've not let himself stray beyond and unknowingly cause the unrelated Anderson goal to be ruled out. The clear rules themselves would change player behaviours.

Partly absence makes the heart grow fonder, probably. Partly he seems to be taking more responsibility on for driving the team performance now.

Agreed, but we're still talking in terms of phases of play. I'm saying that an alternative way of using the offside rule is to say 'Isak kicked the ball forwards when Longstaff was beyond the last defender. Offside'. And there wouldn't be room for any argument about interpretations on that, the flag would've been up before the defender touched the ball.

To be honest, I think the argument would be that Anderson initially fouled the defender by knocking him over, prompting the return foul. I'd want to see it again, but by modern rules, I'd probably be pissed off if it was given against us.

I am surprised we haven't had more breakdowns to be honest.

Yes, agreed with most of that. A combination of altering rules to make them more convenient for VAR to officiate, and also changing rules because the technology enables them to make the game even more sterile. Not so sure about the fairness part though. The argument will be made that the fair result is for the better teams to win. That those who invest the most money should expect to receive the highest return on investment, and that luck and arbitrary measurements like goals pose a threat to that fairness.

I think a lot of these issues stem from muddying the waters around who is and isn't offside. The firmer rule of 'any player beyond is influencing and therefore off' is much clearer and easier to understand. Once you introduce interpretation around 'well he was standing still in the penalty area with his hands in his pockets so the defenders should have ignored him' you get problems.

Yes, that's my understanding also. Plus the picture is intricate, which means it isn't optimized for showing in Google searches or verbally describing......................

Yes, I've thought about this also. I would be happy with multiple logos, to be used in different contexts. Now bracing to be told copyright lawyers and such will blow it out of the water, however...

Apparently VAR and Marxism are cousins The thing is, if someone's primary aim is to improve the precision of information used in decisions - for the sake of fairness - then VAR has to only get more involved in more parts of the game. There's no room for a lighter touch, the touch can only get heavier.

Maybe a bit of an overstatement, but they certainly have a lot of influence over the incomes of businessmen and international gamblers...

It was almost comical how far his footwork was off versus the rest of our midfield.

These last couple of games show how much we missed his smoothness.

My own response; I'd far rather things were left alone, but if it did change I suppose I would want something significantly different. Not a fan of the old crests, assuming the city crest is out the window. Circular is incredibly dull now.

I was so close last night to saying that I'd be open to keeping our current crest so long as we can make the seahorses/hippocampi sluttier

Spot on. I don't accept the validity of the statistics being quoted in the slightest. I predict the methodology will be subjective, incomplete junk.

Ha, hadn't considered that angle. I doubt it, though.

I don't think this is dealing with the fact that VAR has lead to goals now regularly being belatedly cancelled for esoteric reasons invisible to the human eye. Crowd wisdom gave a fair guide on whether a linesman was likely to raise his flag within a couple of seconds of the ball going in the net historically.

To be honest, I think it was as much Bruno knowing he had his number and manipulating him into fouls. 4d chess vs. checkers kind of thing. You could see there was no spice in the reactions after the fouls. Saw nothing tonight that made me regret losing him fortunately.

In spite of everything, maybe my pet favourite moment tonight was him pressing in the last couple of minutes after he'd scored our second. Showed real hunger.

I doubt he'll be here next year, Europe or not. In fact I think Europe makes it less likely.

*Rovers He was on fire tonight. That's the boy I remember seeing playing on loan last year. Was such a threat coming in from the left, Forest couldn't handle him. That driving dribble in their area was really something. Allan who?