"He's taken us as far as he can and it's time to find someone to take us to the next level."
A cautionary tale for clubs that don't have massive resources not to get too carried away.
Rival watch
- Thread starter Spurlock
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
A cautionary tale for clubs that don't have massive resources not to get too carried away.
I don't agree with Leicester's decision to drop 3 players for being naughty.What did it achieve? Gave West Ham 3 points and the chance for Hammers etc to catch up.....Oh!....and pee off their fans who have paid lots of lolly to watch them this season and now possibly lose their CL place......!?
Hit the players where it hurts.......in their wallets!
Hit the players where it hurts.......in their wallets!
They were a health risk for the other players and the staff of both clubs. They were right to drop them.
You must log in or register to see media
Quick, Roy! Go and grab the ball, chuck it out of the net and then phone Fergie.
You must log in or register to see media
Another example of the VAR idiots ****ing it up completely. The measured the wrong ****ing player.
You must log in or register to see media
Another example of the VAR idiots ****ing it up completely. The measured the wrong ****ing player.
The official line that has been trotted out to save face is that the cameras couldn't establish a 'clear angle' at which to draw the line.
Even if true (which it isn't), this just highlights what happens if offsides are measured in atoms. Even with a dozen camera angles filming at 4k quality, if the ball moves quickly enough and the box is congested enough, eventually you will hit a blind spot.
Fortunately for the Baggies, they look to be on course for 3 points regardless. But when PL survival is at stake, that decision could have costed tens of millions. Saying stuff like 'decisions even themselves out as the season goes on' would be of scant comfort to thousands of fans who have been robbed of a year in the PL.
It's Kevin Friend on the VAR. They just didn't want such a high-profile ref to be involved in such a massive **** up.
You're definitely right about the offside nonsense, though. It's a struggle to find a workable, quick solution, but they're not trying too hard.
They are still in deep trouble, but great result tonight. Can’t see Saints persevering with Ralph.
When they're good, they're very good, when they're bad, they're awful.
Soton are a very Jekyll and Hyde team.
I've been puzzling about the over-reliance on technology (which becomes more of an issue when there is an expectation to measure gaps in molecules) since the cup competitions when we saw the nonsense of some ties with and others without VAR. It all depended on the tech capacities of the host stadium. As if that inconsistency wasn't enough of a farce, it did get me wondering about the reality that even across stadia in the same division, there is enormous divergence in terms of what tools VAR officials have at their disposal.
Take Craven Cottage for example. A VAR official trying to measure molecular offside will have no more than 4-5 primary camera angles to consult. At the Hawthorns they'll probably have 6-7. Somewhere like our stadium or the Emirates and you're talking double figures. And then the positioning of the cameras makes a difference. Anfield is notorious for its various 'crows nest' angles, which probably make it much easier to draw the offside line.
FIFA's rule book is maddeningly inconsistent, far too many ifs and buts:
For the use of VAR in any competition the following four basic cameras must be available: A central wide angle camera A central tight angle camera Two 16 meter/18 yard or similar cameras that can be used to assess offside situations
o If super-slow motion cameras are used, the video match officials must have access to all super-slow motion cameras (all three phases for triple speed cameras) o For camera plans with up to eight cameras (including the cameras mentioned above) all cameras must be available to the video match officials
o For camera plans with more than eight cameras, it is at the competition organiser’s discretion to decide how many cameras (in addition to the 8) are made available to the video match officials. However, the basic four cameras and all super-slow motion cameras must always be available to the video match officials. FIFA strongly recommends to make all pitch facing cameras available to the video match officials.
The main RO can monitor a maximum of 12 camera angles. As of camera angle 13, a second RO is mandatory. There is no limit on how many cameras the second RO can monitor.
So in essence, the rule is the more technologically equipped your stadium is, the more accurate VAR will be and the more likely it is that offside decisions will affect the outcome of your game. Even the part about more than 8 cameras being up to the organiser's discretion (although "FIFA 'strongly' recommends to make all pitch facing cameras available")...there is still a world of difference between the minimum required 4 angles and 8! And if a stadium happens to not have super-slow cameras installed (a lot of the lower league teams do not), that removes another game-changing element from the decision-making process.
The whole thing is infuriatingly dense.
Too late though I think.
Got them scoring goals which is the most surprising part of it.....
Allardyce works from back to front and I think we've seen that happen here.
The attacking players have found confidence now that they know that the defence isn't an utter shambles and they might win a game.
They'll probably be among the favourites to come back up.
I wonder if they will ever play Norwich again?