Chris Wood (now playing for Nottingham Forest)

[danny]

Is he good enough for us next season, i dont know i doubt it

Was he brought to do a job in the championship incase we were religated, yes

Dont think he will be playing much next season

But done ok for us in the battle, happy with him for now

[Happinesstan]

18 hours ago, madras said:

Then you're getting into "there's contact so he has every right to down" territory. Was there enough contact to bring him down  ? Was there hell was there enoughbto impede him enough for it to be a foul ? Possibly. 

 

 

Was it a pen ? They are given every time regardless of the rights or wrongs.

You're not. The keeper makes a decision that influences the decision of the striker, the keeper needs to justify that decision by winning the ball cleanly.

[The College Dropout]

I'd be fuming at Dubs in that situation. Sa didn't even pull out of the challenge.

 

Smart play by Wood. Recognised the possible situation and did what was needed. It wasn't an overt fall for a penalty. I think Jota did a bad one recently and won the penalty.

[morpeth mag]

36 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I'd be fuming at Dubs in that situation. Sa didn't even pull out of the challenge.

 

Smart play by Wood. Recognised the possible situation and did what was needed. It wasn't an overt fall for a penalty. I think Jota did a bad one recently and won the penalty.

You don't need to do much to win a pen if you have a red top mind

[PauloGeordio]

27 minutes ago, morpeth mag said:

You don't need to do much to win a pen if you have a red top mind

I have no problem with the penalty. But! if we need a shithousery goal of any kind to win (and many have gone against us) then so be it too. Onwards and upwards

 

I read that as "red top mind" as in always looking for the penalty

 

 

Edited April 11, 2022 by PauloGeordio

[ponsaelius]

19 hours ago, ManDoon said:

 damn. I don’t think offside can be clinical enough for them to say and I don’t care if someone’s toenail is off really. For penalties they should be reviewed, but tiny marginal offsides benefits nobody

 

Saying that offsides can't be judged by human eyes ignores that:

 

1. They have been for 100+ years

2. The offside rule was never, ever intended to be measured to the Nth degree 

 

The point of the offside rule was to stop players goalhanging. Changes to the rule over time have always been to do with adjusting that basic principle (three player to two, own half not offside etc) based on the game as it has evolved.

 

If an attacker is broadly level with a defensive line then that should be absolutely fine. If it's close enough that the video needs pausing and lines drawn on a frame to measure then in my opinion it is not a clear advantage and should be allowed. Chasing perfection is a disingenuous and incorrect interpretation of the rule that has only came about owing to the existence of universal TV coverage and HD cameras.

 

 

Edited April 11, 2022 by ponsaelius

[LV]

2 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

 

Saying that offsides can't be judged by human eyes ignores that:

 

1. They have been for 100+ years

2. The offside rule was never, ever intended to be measured to the Nth degree 

 

The point of the offside rule was to stop players goalhanging. Changes to the rule over time have always been to do with adjusting that basic principle (three player to two, own half not offside etc) based on the game as it has evolved.

 

If an attacker is broadly level with a defensive line then that should be absolutely fine. If it's close enough that the video needs pausing and lines drawn on a frame to measure then in my opinion it is not a clear advantage and should be allowed. Chasing perfection is a disingenuous and incorrect interpretation of the rule that has only came about owing to the existence of universal TV coverage and HD cameras.

 

 

 

Amen

[OverThere]

I'm really confused by the VAR "clear and obvious rule". If it is to be applied I would say offside/onside by a few millimeters would not me considered a clear and obvious mistake. The problem becomes where do you draw the line, 12 inches, 16 inches or what?

[ponsaelius]

If they are absolutely insistant on using VAR for offsides I would just get rid of the lines and the pursuit of perfection which is not possible. Get VAR to let the ref look at a replay if it's clearly miles offside. Otherwise the immediate interpretation at face value should be accepted as fine - with benefit of the doubt given to the attacker. This would get rid of most of these ludicrous MSPaint endeavours which waste minutes of the game.

 

Most of the dubious fingernail offsides should simple be onside. Everybody has lost the plot IMO but the genie is probably out of the bottle now.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

Sterling gains no discernible advantage from his offside position. It really doesn't seem in the spirit of the game to take these types of goals away. I mean its miles apart from when Aguero stood two yards offside against us and headed the ball in from a free kick. 

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

They desperately need a sort of margin of error approach, like Umpire's call in Cricket. If a linesman doesn't flag and you're within a margin of error seems like a goal could stand.  

[ponsaelius]

The other thing I disagree with is the constant clamour for 'transparency'. Refereeing discretion has gone completely out of the window as a result of paranoia and pursuit of perfection. A rugby-esque need for everything to be explained and visualised in the immediacy after it has happened is what leads to lines being drawn on a screen and the flow of the game lost.

 

Let VAR look at the offside as soon as the goal goes but make it a quick look, if it looks more-or-less in line, decision stays with the on-pitch. Move on quickly and get it kicked off again. 

 

Transparency for refereeing after the game, explaining decisions, fine. During the game - nah, fuck off. 

[Yorkie]

9 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

The other thing I disagree with is the constant clamour for 'transparency'. Refereeing discretion has gone completely out of the window as a result of paranoia and pursuit of perfection. A rugby-esque need for everything to be explained and visualised in the immediacy after it has happened is what leads to lines being drawn on a screen and the flow of the game lost.

 

Let VAR look at the offside as soon as the goal goes but make it a quick look, if it looks more-or-less in line, decision stays with the on-pitch. Move on quickly and get it kicked off again. 

 

Transparency for refereeing after the game, explaining decisions, fine. During the game - nah, fuck off. 

 

The irony being that things are less transparent than ever. Before VAR you could see the officials deliberating and discussing; now that discussion is deliberately hidden by earpieces and an unseen room somewhere.  

 

I hate VAR but if we're keeping it then we should be able to hear the refs when a VAR review is being undertaken imo. It would undoubtedly make the spectacle worse (one minute watching rugby proves that), but now the spotlight is on the decision-making process as much as the decisions themselves, paying fans deserve to know why they're being so relentlessly fucked over.

[ponsaelius]

It's a vicious cycle though. I'd rather strip it back then continue on this road.

[Kid Icarus]

If offside can be done with hawkeye to the extent that it's basically like goal-line technology or when you play FIFA, that's ideal imo. The way it as the moment with the pursuit of getting to that level of perfection by drawing lines and ruining the flow of the game is just spoiling it like. 

[Tiresias]

5 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

If offside can be done with hawkeye to the extent that it's basically like goal-line technology or when you play FIFA, that's ideal imo. The way it as the moment with the pursuit of getting to that level of perfection by drawing lines and ruining the flow of the game is just spoiling it like. 

 

It's probably a long way away from that, hawkeye can detect where a ball is in relation to a line, both simple objects, whereas detecting human body shapes in motion is a lot more complicated. Sure some tech bro will come up with some machine learning ai and that will somehow be worse. I think on offside it's largely getting things right and it's kinda silly to complain if something is 'just' offside as that's still offside. Bit of me wishes that as a rule of thumb if the VAR dudes back at base can't very quickly eyeball the static image it's close enough for it not to be a 'obvious' error, but I do see flaws in that.

[morpeth mag]

1 hour ago, PauloGeordio said:

I have no problem with the penalty. But! if we need a shithousery goal of any kind to win (and many have gone against us) then so be it too. Onwards and upwards

 

I read that as "red top mind" as in always looking for the penalty

 

 

 

Sorry for being ambiguous. I literally meant wearing a red top, as in Man Yoo or lfc

[80]

1 hour ago, ponsaelius said:

 

Saying that offsides can't be judged by human eyes ignores that:

 

1. They have been for 100+ years

2. The offside rule was never, ever intended to be measured to the Nth degree 

 

The point of the offside rule was to stop players goalhanging. Changes to the rule over time have always been to do with adjusting that basic principle (three player to two, own half not offside etc) based on the game as it has evolved.

 

If an attacker is broadly level with a defensive line then that should be absolutely fine. If it's close enough that the video needs pausing and lines drawn on a frame to measure then in my opinion it is not a clear advantage and should be allowed. Chasing perfection is a disingenuous and incorrect interpretation of the rule that has only came about owing to the existence of universal TV coverage and HD cameras.

 

 

 

 

100%

 

It's spoiling the game. There are reasons why Football is more popular than Olympic Triple Jump. The business of football is spectacle, and VAR is shit entertainment. It's human competition, not an algorithmic process for establishing who is the superior athlete.

[PauloGeordio]

1 hour ago, morpeth mag said:

Sorry for being ambiguous. I literally meant wearing a red top, as in Man Yoo or lfc

I spotted that after the cogs turned once more

[Teslact]

1 hour ago, 80 said:

 

100%

 

It's spoiling the game. There are reasons why Football is more popular than Olympic Triple Jump. The business of football is spectacle, and VAR is shit entertainment. It's human competition, not an algorithmic process for establishing who is the superior athlete.

 

Didn't expect to find any Jonathan Edwards bashing oh here 

[The College Dropout]

I agree. They should make the lines thicker still.

 

I would love to get rid of the lines but they've opened pandora's box.

 

At 1-0 we conceded to Villa. It was such a tight call but I was glad for the lines in that moment. Can we go back to a world where the lines are gone? The Villa player actually being slightly offside could cost us our safety.

 

Fundamentally the rule needs changing.

 

I remember we lost to City 1-0 under the McLaren relegation with Rafa. Aguero was offside for a whole minute, didn't come back onside at all. VAR is excellent for that and it's great those no longer happen.

[The College Dropout]

At a minimum we need a time limit for each incident.

 

Although in the Ghana Nigeria play-off - the Nigerian striker was miles offside and it took 4 minutes to chalk it off so... there's that...

[WillingtonMag]

Would happily scrap VAR for everything  not even being able to properly cebrate a goal Is fucking ridiculous tbh, even worse for the fans In the stadium who haven't got a clue what's going on.

 

 

Edited April 11, 2022 by WillingtonMag

[Lush Vlad]

6 minutes ago, WillingtonMag said:

Would happily scrap VAR for everything  not even being able to properly cebrate a goal Is fucking ridiculous tbh, even worst for the fans In the stadium who haven't got a clue what's going on.

Always said I was happy for goal line technology and perhaps off the ball violent conduct. As opposed to waiting until after the game to dish out a ban. Otherwise, I didn’t want it. 
 

Watching the Liverpool game yesterday with a load of their fans. Big Mick Quinn was in the pub, actually  both their goals were half celebrated as they thought there may have been an offside. Then Sterling’s ruled out for being a few mm off. It’s madness. 

 

 

Edited April 11, 2022 by Lush Vlad

[LFEE]

If we can’t do daylight then just make it if both feet are in front of defender then you are off. If only one then you are on. All this judging shoulders and toes etc is pathetic.