Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
If Chelsea don’t make the top 4 this season, it will be first time since 2002 that they will have fallen outside the top 4 for two consecutive seasons.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Wolves, in 7th place, i.e. the best of the rest, are almost as close in points difference to the relegation battle (14 points below them) than they are to Chelsea, in 6th position (13 points above them).
The Top 6 continue to drift further away from the rest season after season.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Adlab, no doubt. But ever since the loss to City after new year, Klopp has been looking over his shoulder. And you can see how it’s affected both him and the team. Now thats no longer the case, bizarrely, I think it will relieve the pressure that was on him and it completely changes his outlook on things, and he can revert back to start going for it more which is more his natural game.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Mak, I still think City have got some mixed results in them. In some ways I think it better suits us, mentally speaking, to be chasing rather than to be leading. That’s why I think Klopp has wobbled a bit recently in some games because it’s as though he’s more concerned about ‘holding on’ as opposed to going for it. It’s amazing what the can do to you, psychologically speaking. But regardless, it’s still probably going down to the wire this.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
The run in:
Man City:
Fulham (A)
Cardiff City (H)
Crystal Palace (A)
Spurs (H)
Man Utd (A)
Burnley (A)
Leicester (H)
Brighton (A)Liverpool:
Fulham (A)
Spurs (H)
Southampton (A)
Chelsea (H)
Cardiff City (A)
Huddersfield (H)
Newcastle (A)
Wolves (H)_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Whoever wants the Madrid job should be wary. Hell of a job on there. Aging squad with many on long big contracts and Madrid struggling for money. That’s why they let Ronaldo go. But the expectation will still be huge.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Rafa, tactically speaking, is one of the best in the game.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Interesting (but not surprising analysis) seems to confirm that only managers that aren’t reaching a certain points per £ spent on player salaries (inefficient managers) are ones that have lost their jobs. All managers above the line (efficient ones) are safe in their jobs.
Analysis of Premier League teams suggests only 'inefficient' managers in terms of expected points per £ spent on player salaries have lost their jobs. The 'efficient' managers are still in a job pic.twitter.com/oC3E4Hi0uo
— Stephen Brosnan (@s_brosnan88) March 1, 2019
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
I’m not surprised by that Nine, UEFA were always going to back their referee in such a situation. The wording of the rule in terms of the “natural silhouette” is partly to blame because the PSG defender was running towards the ball and jumping to block it so your arms are always going to be somewhat more elevated to help your balance. That is still arguably a natural position, so as I said there is no context given to this.
But perhaps UEFA would have been better stating to teams that players can no longer try and block shots with their bodies because that seems to be the only logical outcome of the position they have now boxed themselves into – i.e. how can you jump and block a shot with your hands firmly close to your side??
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
I wouldn’t think it takes kindly to driving over speed bumps.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
I think with VAR it’s also a case of “too many cooks spoil the broth”. A ref makes a decision, then gets told to look again which inevitably raises doubt in his mind, and he’ll then look at it in slow mo and everything looks worse in slow mo, and then he might feel pressure to change his mind because he might think he won’t want to go against the other refs opinions/concerns. It’s almost like refereeing by committee. I’d sooner the refs only used it at their discretion when they wanted to check a big decision.
As the saying goes any fool can make something complicated, it’s take a genius to make it simple.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Almost reminds me of that classic Gordon Brown quote…”I take full responsibility for what happened, that’s why the person who was responsible went immediately.”
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Well Clattenburg, because he disagrees with the decision last night, is most probably blaming the ruling to flag it up and influence change. I’m not saying the ruling didn’t have a part to play, but I still think a ref could still have interpreted it differently. Clattenburg for example said the defenders arm was in an unnatural position – well it clearly was in a natural position when he jumped and his arm still stayed pretty close to his side.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Nine, but look at my post at the top of the page – a ref could legitimately not have given that penalty because the defenders arms were still in a natural position, though the rule could perhaps still be better written. If the ball to hand rule comes in that will be ridiculous.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Mak, just my opinion, but I think there’s an element just to be controversial sometimes because that generates a lot of online traffic and hits. That’s what Piers Morgan does on his morning chat show and love him or loathe him it stirs the pot and thus generates the traffic which is what the media ultimately want because it means greater revenues.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Nine, tbf I think there are always going to be grey areas where different refs interpret things differently – what you really want from a ref is one that looks at everything in context and from experience/reality and judges accordingly. What you don’t want is a referee focussed solely on the literal theoretical part of the law and incident and applying it directly. And VAR promotes such behaviour particularly because things always look worse in slow mo.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Ed, the key part of the rule so far as I understand is (via https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47471380).
“…if he (the defender) is looking to block a cross or a shot on goal and the player is trying to spread his body then it is a handball.”
Ifab chief David Elleray explained: “If the arms are extended beyond that (natural) silhouette then the body is being made unnaturally bigger, with the purpose of it being a bigger barrier to the opponent or the ball.”
So the referee has deduced the player did make his body unfairly bigger when blocking the shot but has failed to account for the fact a player will slightly raise their arms when jumping to help with their balance. So surely that would still mean the “natural silhouette” of the player was maintained because when you jump your natural silhouette will change slightly. It is that that the referee did not account for. Would the ref have been severely criticised by his superiors had he not given the penalty under the current rule? Not convinced. As I say I think VAR helps promote tunnel vision into a ref’s mind – i.e. all he sees is the ball hitting the slightly outstretched arm and then applies the law but without the bigger picture/context.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Also interesting – Had VAR not been adopted last night, Man Utd would not have broken this record. VAR is literally changing the game.
1 – Manchester United are the first team in Champions League history to progress to the next round having lost by two or more goals at home in the first leg of a knockout match. Incredible. #PSGMUN
— OptaJoe (@OptaJoe) March 6, 2019
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Last night was the 9th consecutive away game won under Solskjaer.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Adlab, I actually do think VAR is a contributory factor regardless of interpretation. I think it causes referees to concentrate to the point of tunnel vision on the actual incident and so they don’t look at the context/big picture of the situation. They don’t see the wood for the trees. I think it’s an awful thing and whilst there’s nothing we can do to now stop it I just hope they adjust things and learn big lessons on how to try and get the best out of it, though I think it’s a fundamentally flawed thing for the reasons above.
_____________________________
React below 👇
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
