Cronky

I think it would have come down to not being a 'clear and obvious' error. The ball did hit his arm. Having said that, the player was unlucky, because the ball came to him unexpectedly after a deflection, and don't think there was a deliberate attempt to handle the ball. I think the ref made the wrong decision, but it wasn't 'clearly and obviously' wrong.

The Bournemouth fans were right - the guy is a genius. On paper our defence was lousy - second choice keeper in Dubs, Krafth-Schar-Burn at centre back, with Anderson and Murphy not in their ideal roles as wing-backs. With 27% possession, we beat a CL standard side 4-0. Go figure.

I'm not sure how truly independent this regulator can be. I can see the value of regulations to govern expenditure and debt, which would apply across the board. That sort of regulation exists in various areas of the financial and commercial sector. But the regulator's remit also seems to extend to deciding how much income should be redistributed from the wealthy to the more impoverished. That seems to me to be a political decision, rather than one of independent regulation. The EFL clubs seem to have decided that whatever the Premiership offers, they're bound to get a better deal from the independent regulator, for which read the government. There is a strong case for evening out the income differences between the PL and the EFL, and between the Champions League elite and the rest of the Premiership. The current situation tends to ossify certain groups, and leads to owners taking risks to bridge those gaps which can lead to financial difficulty or falling foul of the FFP regulations. If the new regulator can come up with a coherent plan to improve that situation, then fair enough. The current reality is that there are different vested interests, and a genuine overall consensus is well nigh impossible to achieve.

We're then in the territory of how to define 'obvious'. You can't completely remove the element of subjectivity.

I don't think the aim was to 'solve' anything. It was just to make the decision-making around important decisions a bit better, by reducing the number of howlers. It's never going to be perfect, though I think some improvements will still be made as the officials grow in experience. I do suspect that many of those who are moaning the loudest now, were the ones who were most keen on bringing it in. And the worst culprits are ex-players, who spent a large part of their careers moaning about officials and can now continue unabated.

I'd see this as more of a grey area. If you want VAR to get involved in issues other than matters of fact like offside, then you have to accept that some decisions will be debatable. OTT reactions like O'Neil's - 'worst decision I've ever seen' - don't help. There is a case for disallowing the goal because the player was in an offside position and he took up that position in order to obstruct the keeper's vision and movement. It's something that we see every game. Yes, as it happened the keeper could probably have seen the ball and wouldn't have saved it, but should we be expecting a ref to make a judgement like that?

It may help if there is some clarity about punishments in advance - ie an overspend of x automatically leads to a punishment of y. I think the problem with the current system is that clubs enter into a long process of dispute and the outcome is uncertain and only clear after years, potentially. You then have the issue of clubs who have been adversely affected by a rival's misdemeanours suing them for compensation, when in fact the damage has been done a long time ago. It all ends up in the hands of lawyers rather than the people with responsibility for the game. Removing these delays and uncertainties may be the best way forward.

Mathematically safe from relegation. Yay!

I think if a club like Man City trigger his release clause, he’d be off. I wouldn’t blame him. It’s a short career and opportunities like that can’t be guaranteed to recur. He has made a huge contribution, so I’d wish him well if that happened. I’d much prefer it if he went to Barca or the like though.

His skill on the ball is obvious but he isn’t particularly strong. He’s still only 19, but I do keep wondering whether his best role is further forward. We still seem to be getting linked with left backs, so it wouldn’t surprise me if in the end we let him go. That would be a shame because I’m pretty sure that at some stage, in some role, he’s going to come good.

Presumably that was considered a goal-scoring opportunity, in which case that goes way above the usual interpretation. English refs I would agree are more consistent. Having said that, I would like to see the definition of 'goal-scoring opportunity' broadened a bit. At the moment, it seems in practice to be along the lines 'would probably have scored', rather than just 'had an opportunity to score'. If they made the punishment more appropriate ie a penalty and a yellow rather than a sending off, then I think refs would find it easier to give. Those sorts of fouls in that situation are more deserving of a penalty than some of the fouls in the area that get given. And before anyone starts, there is no practical reason why the law can't be changed.

ABC - anyone but City for me. Apart from the overwhelming question marks over how it's all been funded, they are so boring to watch. They strangle the opposition of possession, and turn games into attack v defence.

From West Ham's point of view it was a classic case of relaxing too much after going into a two-goal lead. The danger is that the opposition throws everything into attack, gets a goal back, and then the momentum of the game is entirely changed. Once we got that goal, we looked like winners. Last season, our back five always seemed better than the sum of its parts, and that was down to Eddie's preparation. This season, there's been a lot of chopping and changing due to injuries, and the vulnerability of some individuals has been exposed - in particular their lack of pace. There's a lot of speculation about whether Eddie can take us to the 'next level', but our available squad this season hasn't looked anything like the 'next level'.

Eddie obviously has little faith in Hall as a defender. The decision to switch Livramento to the left and put Krafth on backfired when it became clear that Krafth was not in a confident frame of mind. That lack of confidence led to him playing Antonio onside, and not long after he gave the ball away in a dangerous situation. Krafth has looked poor and quite decent in different phases of his time here, and yesterday he turned out to be poor. When we went two goals down, Eddie had to gamble, and that's when Hall really came into his own. He participated well in attack and made a difference. I think Eddie's reasoning is that the back five is already quite weak, and doesn't have protection from a defensive midfielder, so he can't afford to have a young, attack minded full back who may be vulnerable at the back post in particular. So yes, Eddie got it wrong, but he's a manager who's prepared to back his own judgement even when more orthodox opinion might sway things another way. Most of the time, that attitude stands us in very good stead, as we can see by what's happened under his leadership. Occasionally, his boldness is going to leave him open to criticism, but let's not lose hold of the bigger picture. Anyway, I think we can now look forward to young Lewis showing us what he's made of.

Why was Eddie booked, incidentally?

I thought he did well when he came on. Got involved right away, eager to make his mark, showed some good, decisive touches. I don't think Eddie's got any choice but to play him now.

I'm not sure I've ever screamed as loud and as long as when that fourth goal went in. Thank you, guys. I've had a shit week and that's just what I needed.

Bit of a common-sense failure on the ref's part. If there's a centre back down injured, you really shouldn't allow a quick free kick. Technically there's nothing against the rules there, and maybe he thought Schar was making a meal of it. But it's still not the best call, particularly if it's based on a hunch.

Crucially, it looks like he admitted this additional period of betting at the time of the investigation last year. I assume that the FA have delayed any charge so that they could be assured that Tonali had not done any further betting after October.

I think you've forgotten what it's like to struggle! I checked, and in the four seasons before the one that you named, you came first twice, and second twice. That's not exactly taking over a shitshow. The players that you've named are only poor in comparison to the ones that Pep brought in - as you acknowledge, at considerable expense. And in Rodri's case, it's hard to believe that Pep decided to pay a club record £60m for an 'absolute donkey'. But as I said, he has transformed football, and he could hardly do better than what he has achieved at City - 5 titles in 6 seasons speaks for itself.

1. Pep - actually a difficult manager to assess in comparison with others, because he's always had great players and massive clubs to work with. But his ideas have revolutionised football at the top level, and his long list of trophies has to put him up there. 2. Klopp - has become a major irritant, but has proved himself with big clubs and smaller clubs alike. He has a record of success to point to, and his teams always play with great energy. 3. Howe - difficult to separate off my bias, but he has over-achieved massively with two clubs that were right on the ropes. How he would deal with a post at a big club which wasn't a rescue job is an intriguing issue. He has to mould things his own way and perhaps isn't so adaptable - bit like Brian Clough. My belief is that there's more to come from this guy and we have to hang on in there. 4. Postecoglou - tempting to put him equal third with Eddie, but that would have been a cop-out. Like Eddie, he has his own ideas and his own style, and has forged his own way. Next season could really be his year. 5. Emery - has that record of success, and his clearly doing well with Villa. Players seem to rate him highly. I get the impression that he's a bit of a moody sod though. He seems to have his lapses.

Drat and triple drat. I was hoping they'd field a slightly weakened side. Looks like we will be arranging the public transport in a suitably obstructive position.

I don’t think Eddie would get a job with the big six yet. Those owners probably need the reassurance of past trophies. I think there’s also a prejudice that British bosses are glorified Mike Bassetts whereas foreign managers are insightful, scientific professorial types like Arsene Wenger. We nearly didn’t employ Eddie ourselves of course. When we lost to Villa last season and to Liverpool at home this season, the view that was expressed on here quite a few times was that Eddie had been outsmarted tactically. Well by the same token, Eddie has outsmarted quite a few big names over the last two years. Long may he go under their radars, say I.

Yeah, this. Many so-called neutrals, inside and outside the media, want us to fail. It’s nothing against Eddie. It’s the all too human desire to feel better by laughing at someone continuing to fall flat on their face. Over the years, we’ve provided others with much entertainment of that nature, and they don’t want it to stop. They must dread the huge celebrations that will follow should we eventually win something. There’s also the issue of Geordies being slightly separate in identity from the rest of England. Bit like the Scousers, though of course they have years of success behind them. It’s all got a bit weird. The pundits acknowledge the problems Eddie has had this season, and then proceed to talk like they don’t exist. At times, it sounds like they’re trying to persuade the owners to sack him.

I'm guessing he called him a bastard. If you're going to publicly accuse someone, you shouldn't leave room for speculation like that. Either put up or shut up.