Cf

WTF

That's probably better than their goal tbf

What a fucking player we have.

Isn't this just called playing football?

I've really liked this aspect about the league this season. It's a shame about the gulf in quality between the PL and Championship and that the promoted teams are basically fodder. But it feels like anyone could be up there in a way that's not been the case before.

Wasn't even fucking managing us at the time.

You can question the original foul sure. But the notion of "players were involved in handbags, book both of them" doesn't hold up. It wasn't that bad from Gordon but a bit more experience and you hope he doesn't react there. We're so far ahead of them that we don't need to drag the game into that level.

Not sure I buy this when it was Gordon who instigated the hand bags.

We needed that. Next couple of games are going to be tough so hopefully a nice confidence boost. I don't think long term the result really mattered but I can see how a loss would have brought a lot of pressure on the club so it's nice to see that scenario avoided.

People are aware the subs at this point are completely irrelevant right?

To be fair no one would have expected the cross.

...the refs been fine.

Yeah having watched the analysis hard to disagree with this.

Is it as hard for the players to tell who is who as it is for us?

Why does their logo look like it's been made in microsoft word?

Expected team.

Am I the only one who thinks Miley looks decent and has the potential to grow into a great player but at his current levels if we had a fit squad he should be nowhere near starting and only getting the odd cameo?

Won't make any difference to my opinion of him at this point.

Disagree. Especially for offsides. I think the main thing making VAR really contentious this season is the notion of sticking with the on field decision. Without VAR we can forgive a linesman for getting a close offside wrong, or even a ref giving a pen because he thought there was more contact than there was for Dubravka. We have a little moan and then move on with our lives. With the above you're accepting that officials on the pitch can get it wrong. They're only human and referring a football match is no easy feat. But by the time you're stopping the game so you can look at a video replay I think the goal has to be making the right decision. It's not a "clear and obvious" mistake so stick with the on-field decision implies that we are accepting "lesser mistakes". I'm willing to bet we've had a number of incidents that even if the officials won't admit it in public, in hindsight the ref would have changed his decision had VAR been a bit more proactive in challenging the decision. I think VAR needs to ask the ref to look at the replay again more rather than the current system where being asked to look again means "you fucked up". Just let the ref use it to have another look so he can confirm he saw what he thought he saw. Time consuming? Probably. But we've decided we want to use replays to referee games so I think it's inevitable. I don't see how using replays but coming to the wrong decision anyway is sustainable. As ever: I'd ditch VAR completely if given the chance.

That's potentially even worse. Now you'd have reviews that are trying to work out did it hit the shoulder or chest? Precisely which bit? Now lets review the offside and try to line up those parts of the body. Keep it simple. Feet.

The generally accepted purpose of the offside rule is to prevent unfair advantages for attackers by goal hanging and basically making the game dull. Is the attacker's shoulder a few cm ahead of the defender doesn't fall under that definition. Now the line has to be somewhere. But I reckon simply basing it off the position of the feet would be an excellent simplification to the rule. Removes all ambiguity, easy to explain, and easier to visualise as a fan. Take the Isak one the other day. He's basically in the same position as the defender. Yet he's leaning forward because as an attacker he's running in the direction of the goal. The defender is doing the opposite. They're both in short doing their jobs but I don't see what is "unfair" about an attacker being in an attack position.

Hiring people isn't an exact science unless you're poaching people you've previously worked with from elsewhere. Moving people on isn't necessarily a concern. It could just be because they're not performing to the standard you expect. It could start to be an issue if it's happening regularly and calls your hiring processes into question but it's far too early to draw any conclusions like that.

38 games is a great number of games for a season. Allows variance to play it's part but not too much.

Yeah that's fair. But I can't help but feel there's a certain element of it's not hard to be world class at a world class club. You can obviously fail at that level. But at the same time I suspect there's plenty of managers who'd be just as good as the ones you mention if given a chance. Eddie will get his chance here over the next few years if appropriately supported.

Yeah you can probably throw them in too. But then take a look at Conte he hardly set the world on fire at Spurs recently when he didn't have the elite squad. Not trying to pick a fight I just don't find people saying "Eddie howe isn't elite because he's not won anything" very helpful because I think it's more nuanced than that. If Howe isn't world class like everyone else in that list would we therefore have expected all of them to achieve what Howe did in his first two seasons? I'm not sure I would.