a-k

According to the BBC, has scored in his last 7 appearances against us. Granted, we didn't have Emi in net for those...

WTF is this bollocks from Garth Crooks: HITC This is so blasphemously outrageous that I am speechless.

I agree, they don’t look like the worst PL side of all time, but they just can’t score. However, the 20 million pound man who they brought in to score is a 20 year old with 10 senior goals, and none at top level. They deserve what they’ve gotten.

Nice to see our local rivals doing us a favour for once.

Anyone else notice Martin Tyler's constant heavy breathing into the mic?

PGMOL said it was looked at and wasn't a clear and obvious error. Outrageous.

VAR could and should have reviewed it and given a penalty for the foul by Meslier on Mee.

But what Meslier just did to the word removed Mee is acceptable?

I'd like to see that again but sure looked like Pope got the ball before the man. Apparently, the rule is that if the attacking player is in the box but doesn't score on the rebound or interfere somehow, then it's OK, which is bollocks because an attacking player standing in the box can definitely put the keeper off.

Arse of steel, look at the way Zaha's foot just bounces off of it.

Where would you have liked Mings to have put his left foot down then? He puts it any more natural than this and he ends up right on McGinn. Even if he could put it behind the white line, he still goes through McGinn's foot on the follow through.

Grealish v. Palace. Second clip is actually AEG, but to be fair we the way he's done the defender I also thought it was Jack when seeing it live. Pass to Watkins that sliced through half of Palace is the last clip.

If Mings didn't change from a natural movement, McGinn would be on the treatment table for a nasty gash over his Achilles. Would you be happier with that?

Seeing that headline AFTER having already transferred KDB into my fantasy squad.

Yes, the on-field ref gave the pen. But, the point is VAR had him come to the monitor because they believed the on-field ref made a clear and obvious error by not sending the player off. IMO, VAR is just as much at fault because they could (and should) have told the on-field ref to look at the monitor because it is NOT even a pen. I could be wrong about this, but that's how I view it based on the available information.

Is that correct? As I mentioned earlier, on commentary they mentioned as the ref was going to the monitor that they understood the penalty decision would stand and that the ref was being asked to check for a red card offense. Apparently the commentators get to listen directly to the conversations between VAR and the on-field ref, so I would guess they are correct. I haven't read anything official saying otherwise. This is where the transparency of fans also being able to listen to these conversations is needed. What did VAR actually tell the on-field ref to send him to the monitor? Why did the ref reach for his pocket, then stop and go back to the monitor to watch it again?

Surely then the refs involved (on-pitch and VAR) have to be reprimanded in some way for using video and STILL getting the decision wrong??

You can even see when there is 63:00 on the clock that he has quick look directly at the ref to see if he needs to start rolling around

I made it into a gif so we can appreciate Bamford going for the spectacular overhead kick dive

Rubbish pass accuracy though. Let's get Westwood back.

So, after 14 league games this season they have the most impressive 4-3 loss, the most impressive 6-2 loss, contender for dive of the season (Ayling vs Leicester), and contender for cheat of the season (Bamford trying to get Mings sent off even though he stamped on Mings). Oh, and they are averaging 3.6 goals against with one point vs last season's top 6. Fabulous start to the season and everything that future promoted clubs should strive to match.

I meant “in 5 of 12”

That's what the almanacs will say, but to anyone watching it's 5 in 12 games with an average of 2 goals per 3 games.

I don't recall which manager said it, but the problem is that now the games are being refereed twice and it has become a vicious circle. They're so worried about getting every little decision right that they start looking for the smallest of details so that they can back their decision of not being "wrong". Pre-VAR, if Ollie was flagged offside by the linesman vs West Ham or Baggies, the response would be "ooooh, not sure, that's really close", but we can live with those tight decisions being made split-second at full speed. As said many times by many people, if you have to get out the lines then it is not a clear and obvious mistake; nor is it even a factual a mistake because of the subjectivity and technical limitations (choosing where to "place" the line, which frame, etc.). The other thing is that VAR apparently doesn't consider there to be any sources of error in judging offside from lines on the screen. No measurement method is foolproof---all come with some sort of error and variation. This is well-known in science and therefore you generally have to show that your findings are larger than the error associated with whatever measurement scale you are using. So, is VAR better than science? They need to look at the footage in question and say to themselves, "is there conclusive evidence that the on-field decision was incorrect?" That is how it is done in other sports and how it should be done in football, but they've dug themselves into such a big hole already (that some refs have plausibly filled with cash) that I doubt they will listen to the fans or the pundits.

It did to me too, but it's deceptive...just used an image analysis tool and they match...the lines intersect the outside of the box at roughly 33% the white line's length in the image, if that makes sense. Doesn't matter thought, because it's absolute bollocks decision.