HKP90

1 minute ago, ThunderPower_14 said:

I do really like the idea that refs can call for another look without VAR intervening for things like penalty shouts and red cards. There is really no reason why the ref can't ask the question himself, unless play is still going.

I think refs are far more likely to call out their own mistakes than they are to call out the mistakes of their colleagues. VAR will always err on the side of the onfield ref for this reason. The onfield ref has a feel for the game, and if the responsibility and accountability for the decision is placed squarely on them, then we'll be more likely to get correct decisions.

If the onfield ref knew beyond any doubt that Young didn't get the ball, he's giving a penalty 100% of the time, but you have a situation here where a VAR official in an air conditioned office somewhere away from the coalface is basically guessing why the onfield ref didn't give it and is loathe to overturn a decision made by one of his colleagues. Ridiculous. Just let the onfield ref review his own work, with the full weight of responsibility for getting it right on his shoulders.

Agree 100% with all of this.

2 minutes ago, mrchnry said:

It's obvious that they'll launch it as soon as we either win ECL or qualify for champions league because if we complain it will make the fans look like they're never satisfied. Pure gaslighting 

To be fair that will work. I'm pretty sure I won't give two shits if we achieve either of those things. If we get both I won't give 4 shits (2² shits)

Next year Morgan is gonna be Grealish level, i'm telling you. Him and Ollie are like, in a tree, or something (i've forgotten how the rhyme goes tbh). 

5 hours ago, birdman said:

That's fair. I applaud you for giving him some credit something I struggle with

Lucky he didn't credit Klopp for being in the same country that Rogers grew up in. 

9 minutes ago, est1874 said:

Sorry for trying to make light of something that people have gotten carried away about, I'll never do it again

Here's the thing: You're not changing the situation or making it even 0.1% better by complaining. There is a thread here with 230 pages worth of posts, months and months of people complaining, and it's been silence from the club. It's almost as if they know they're damned if they do and damned if they don't!

I don't like any of the 3 badges but what I've learned from that is that the club is not going to be able to please me while also pleasing everybody else. You might want to think about that for yourself. It's literally impossible. Someone will say in response "it doesn't need to please me it just needs to not be shit", but I'm sorry, that's just not true, this thread proves it. People (by which I mean "the majority") will not be happy with anything less than the image they have in their head of what the badge should look like. Their idea / preference is the right one.

Yes Heck's badge is crap. Yes, so are the others. Yes it's all very frustrating. But if you can't, after 230 pages and endless moaning from countless posters, throw your hands up in the air and try to have a sense of humour about things, then I feel sorry for you.

 

We are supporters. We don't change any situation by doing anything. Why post anything at all by that criterion?

5 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

What is the conspiracy against Nottingham Forest? I'm sure every team can make a reel like this. Ours could probably look as juicy as this from memory. There's no conspiracy, the refs are just not very good and often make mistakes. But no, I'm sure it's because the FA (?) don't want Forest in the PL.

I'm not sure I take much in the way of comfort from that. 

7 minutes ago, est1874 said:

Or you could choose to look at the situation with a sense of humour.

Looking unprofessional is H-i-larious. 

3 hours ago, Pinebro said:

Chelsea got to be the most random team in the league.

They could be brilliant or relegation fodder.

Completely random which version turns up.

It's Villa, I think we know which will turn up. See Man U for details. We'll just have to be better. At least we'll have had a bit of a breather. 

Spurs don't play til Sunday, so if we could get a result here, and it's by no means certain,we would be 9 points ahead. They would be under immense pressure to go to Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool and get results. 

Please choke spurs, please choke. 

1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said:

Isn't the point that 'clear and obvious' doesn't really apply to offsides, because they believe (perhaps wrongly) that their lines are factual and definitive? Or 'Factual offside decisions will be based on the evidence provided by fully calibrated offside lines', per the Premier League's website: https://www.premierleague.com/news/1297392

I think that's why they just come out with a ruling on those rather than referring the ref, but I would like to see what calibration they use, as in several of the shots showing the lines, they run over Wan Bissaka's foot. 

1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said:

This is in danger of getting off-topic perhaps, but what decision in the FA Cup was clearly 'incorrect'? Have I missed some definitive conclusion about the offside goal being wrong, because to me that looked so close I don't know how anybody could say confidently the decision was right *or* wrong. 

That was the 'clearly incorrect' element. VAR made a decision to overrule the onfield decision, which was a goal, when they did not have the clear evidence that the goal was offside. That was just wrong. 

33 minutes ago, sne said:

Like the stupid West Ham one

At least it would allow you to set up your HDR levels on your TV. 

'Increase brightness until badge is barely visible'. 

22 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

The word salad here to justify it:

Here you go, I made the protocol better

Ref: ball, no pen!

VAR: He didn't get the ball so you should take another look

Then the on field ref can decide if THEY made the mistake or not.

The way they've implemented it is just horrific.

Referees won't call out their own mistakes when they are presented with an opportunity to reinforce their credibility. They will think it makes them look weak (even though it would actually show qualities of self criticism, which is a strength). It will also I'm sure be monitored, so if they make a number of mistakes, it will add to a database of their errors which will reduce the chance that they get more work. The system as is allows refs to delegate responsibility to VAR, which is exactly what they are doing. 

The only way I see VAR actually offering any help, is as a tool, to be used by referees at their own judgment at the side of the pitch, without the referral. That way refs can use it to bolster their own decision making, without implication of error.  

Sigh.

5 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

If no-one expects 100% accuracy, then everyone is expecting mistakes. It's not a surprise that if mistakes occur, *sometimes* they will occur in a visible and potentially outcome-altering way like three penalty claims (though it's far from clear to me that three mistakes were made, I think only the last one is a clear mistake). The implication of 'no-one is expecting 100% accuracy' is that ultimately you have to have some tolerance of human error. 

Well yeah, but when bad refereeing is not just influencing, but deciding the outcomes of games, particularly a cup semi final, the human error continuum is tilted to the point of being inflected. And it's every bloody week. Not expecting 100% accuracy, but I don't think it's beyond the realms of whimsy to expect 'mostly accurate', or 'occasionally inaccurate'. That's two big games games ruined in one day. 

By their own figures, which are likely to be wild underestimates, the Premier League have recorded 20 VAR incidents alone- that's 20 incidents which have been considered in slow motion, by multiple cameras for minutes on end- that have been incorrect. And that does not include incorrect calls by refs that were ineligible for VAR review. 

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

If 'the standard of refereeing [everywhere]' is 'wholly unacceptable', I think you ultimately have to ask whether the problem is more to do with your [our] expectations and less to do with the decisions. 

Why? It is their job to get decisions correct. No-one is expecting 100% accuracy, but to have (in the case of the Notts forest game) at least two potentially game altering decisions made incorrectly- potentially earning them a draw and a point toward survival, and (in the Coventry game) to have the principal outcome of the game REVERSED due to an incorrect decision that was reviewed by at least 3 officials- sending the wrong team to a cup final, is imo......unacceptable. 

38 minutes ago, Zatman said:

I think the statement is more mature than Klopp accusong a ref to be biased in his face or Arteta abusing and sarcastically clapping refs

Maybe if English football media and organisations didnt embrace this scumbag behavior then Forest might have not made the tweet. English football has allowed ref abuse for too long

Problem is that manager's jobs are on the line, and appear to be dictated by the incompetence of referees and VAR. If my livelihood even tangentially revolved around someone outside of my control who, because they were not good enough to do their job, could result in my dismissal, you gotta know that I am calling them out in no uncertain terms. 

I don't think referee abuse should be tolerated, but they absolutely should be called out if they cannot do their job. As much as managers have a responsibility to not abuse match officials, referees have a responsibility to not be shit. Which they demonstrably are. You see it on MOTD all the time. About half of the summary of every game now is- so and so got this decision wrong. The standard of refereeing in this country (and elsewhere as we saw against Lille) is itself wholly unacceptable.  

15 minutes ago, trom_borg said:

So Heck kept us all in suspense over the new badge release for what reason exactly? To hope CL would make us all forget our next badge will have a wordart style drop shadow on it? The detailed lion on the second leak made the badge look ok. This version is an embarrassment tbh, I just can't believe how amateur it looks  

Yes.

4>NV>3>76

76 being least, mainly as I don't really do MMOs.

3 had a major bug for me, in that the ending was sort of ruined as I found a way to do it without....

...but as the story called for it, I did anyway. 

I equipped some configuration of stuff (it was a long while ago, so I don't remember what) which made me completely immune to radiation, and then did the last mission, and it....

....me anyway. When the credits rolled, whatever emotion I was supposed to feel was overtaken by annoyance that while I'd found a way to beat the game it punished me anyway. For that reason, as much fun as I had with 3, I've never picked it up again. 

New Vegas was great, but 4 edges it on graphics, size etc. 

37 minutes ago, MrBlack said:

I've heard this a few times. Everton have a game in hand and two very winnable fixtures (3 if you include the Luton game)

Forest were a point behind them with a more difficult run in.  If I was a Luton fan I'd absolutely be wanting Forest to lose that game. 

Part of me wonders if it was a self fulfilling prophecy though. By trying to get the VAR changed, they're immediately questioning his integrity. Maybe he wanted to live up to their expectations. 

Shocking call on the last of the three penalties.  The other two are consistent with what we've seen recently. They're borderline judgemental calls that aren't getting over turned. 

The Coventry decision got overturned and that was as borderline as it gets. There is no consistency. Like. At all. 

That run to set up the third, and the weight of the pass for Diaby's goal- just exquisite.

Third is 1000% a penalty. First was close. I might have given it. I would not have given the handball.