Today's footie 4/9

[taio]

no worries mate. The relevance is just the nonsense re-officiating of on field decisions - they are looking for reasons to disallow goals and it should be the opposite.

They just said the offside today was given offside by the ref because the VAR couldn't decide if the Brighton player was interfering with play - so that is a subjective decision by the ref and not black and white. It's ruining the game

I agree the interfering decision is subjective. But the sequencing was correct. First, confirm the player was in an offside position. Second, make a subjective decision about whether he was interfering, which was correctly at the ref's discretion.

[LeadBelly]

Can't see how Rodgers survives this mauling.

Villa home next (then Spuds away). If he survives that long I think he probably needs to beat Villa to get as far as Spurs. They do have Forest home and Bournemouth away after that- so some hope of points for them then at least if the owners stay with him.

He's odds on (1/5 with one bookie) to be the next EPL sacking.

[taio]

it cannot be factual if they cannot measure it accurately - that is undeniable

It was a factual decision ie was the player in an offside position or not - they correctly determined he was.

[Spindles]

Love Brighton’s style of play. This is what I’d hope we could progress to should we make it back. Before people jump on the Brighton have spent ridiculous sums train, Potter’s net spend since appointed is one of the lowest in the league.

Don't buy this argument really - if you buy really expensive players with your owner's cash then obviously when you sell them you will make a good profit on them - net spend is a completely bogus stat. Spend to "turnover without player sales" would give a better indication of whether a team is being bankrolled. Plus you also have to factor in wages and the like.

[Vegas Claret]

3 yards offside, didn't need lines to see how far offside he was. Miles off, clearly interfering with play. No idea why it took so long, maybe they have to draw lines for protocol but they really didn't need them in this instance.

maybe they don't show the lines over there on TV ? They measured from the Leicester defenders arm (in between the two Brighton lads) down to the foot of the nearest to the touchline Brighton defender, the lines made it look like half the width of a line max (it's been proven by the link I posted at that level the technology isn't accurate).

At least it still gives us something to discuss

[KRBFC]

Don't buy this argument really - if you buy really expensive players with your owner's cash then obviously when you sell them you will make a good profit on them - net spend is a completely bogus stat. Spend to "turnover without player sales" would give a better indication of whether a team is being bankrolled. Plus you also have to factor in wages and the like.

Caicedo £4.5m
Trossard £12m
Mac Allister £7m
Gross £2.7m

[Vegas Claret]

Caicedo £4.5m
Trossard £12m
Mac Allister £7m
Gross £2.7m

they also seem to have bought loads in (I've lost count) of players that haven't made the grade and have moved on - did they make profit on any of those lads ? I've no idea just asking btw

[Chester Perry]

Don't buy this argument really - if you buy really expensive players with your owner's cash then obviously when you sell them you will make a good profit on them - net spend is a completely bogus stat. Spend to "turnover without player sales" would give a better indication of whether a team is being bankrolled. Plus you also have to factor in wages and the like.

I remember someone droning endlessly on about the Wages + Amortisation to revenue ratio - many didn't like it because it didn't suit their point of view

[RVclaret]

Don't buy this argument really - if you buy really expensive players with your owner's cash then obviously when you sell them you will make a good profit on them - net spend is a completely bogus stat. Spend to "turnover without player sales" would give a better indication of whether a team is being bankrolled. Plus you also have to factor in wages and the like.

A large portion of that starting 11 today were low cost.

Veltman 900k, Caicedo 4.5m, Welbeck free, MacAllister 7m, Gross 2.7m, Sanchez (academy), March (academy), Dunk (academy).

We were always told the market was too difficult.

Point being most of Potters signings have been low cost and coached well, then sold for profit.

They were asking for 50m in the summer for Sanchez and similar amount for Caicedo. One of them will probably be sold next summer and someone else will step up.

[Vegas Claret]

It was a factual decision ie was the player in an offside position or not - they correctly determined he was.

He looked offside to me, the lino should have given it or not. They used a technology that can't measure correctly to try and prove it - that's the issue, it's simply incapable of producing "a factual decision" - when you have a min read the article I linked.

[Stayingup]

Oooops Leicester bye bye bye Rodgers

Rodgers has been let down by the owners. He's not been backed. They have not been making as much money at home with their Duty Free King Power business through Covid and loss of customers. They have sold a lot of good players . Sound familiar???

[taio]

He looked offside to me, the lino should have given it or not. They used a technology that can't measure correctly to try and prove it - that's the issue, it's simply incapable of producing "a factual decision" - when you have a min read the article I linked.

Im just judging this specific incident on its own merits. It was offside and it was a factual decision in this instance. Generally speaking I'm not really a fan of VAR but that hasn't influenced what I think about this particular decision.

[KRBFC]

He looked offside to me, the lino should have given it or not. They used a technology that can't measure correctly to try and prove it - that's the issue, it's simply incapable of producing "a factual decision" - when you have a min read the article I linked.

the lino missed it, VAR correctly made the decision. I thought that was VAR's use, to highlight errors made by officials.

[milkcrate_mosh]

Don't buy this argument really - if you buy really expensive players with your owner's cash then obviously when you sell them you will make a good profit on them - net spend is a completely bogus stat. Spend to "turnover without player sales" would give a better indication of whether a team is being bankrolled. Plus you also have to factor in wages and the like.

I think a cumulative loss of >200 million over the last 10 years would support this.



Obviously they've done extremely well with money received in the last 12-18 months but prior to that they had made less profit on players sales in the last 5 years than any team in the premier league. The idea that their transfer spending has been facilitated by player sales doesn't bear much scrutiny historically - maybe they've now reached a point where their scouting and recruiting will be self sufficient but it took a huge upfront investment to get to that point.

[Vegas Claret]

the lino missed it, VAR correctly made the decision. I thought that was VAR's use, to highlight errors made by officials.

read the article

[Chester Perry]

A large portion of that starting 11 today were low cost.

Veltman 900k, Caicedo 4.5m, Welbeck free, MacAllister 7m, Gross 2.7m, Sanchez (academy), March (academy), Dunk (academy).

We were always told the market was too difficult.

Point being most of Potters signings have been low cost and coached well, then sold for profit.

They were asking for 50m in the summer for Sanchez and similar amount for Caicedo. One of them will probably be sold next summer and someone else will step up.

According to the last accounts Tony Bloom has now put £427m into the club - They are one of the biggest loss making operations in the history of football as of the last accounts - likely to change with future player sales

last accounts
Wages £94m
Amortisation £46m
Revenue £140m

W+A/R = 100%

[Vegas Claret]

1-0 Arsenal

[taio]

Disallowed.

[ElectroClaret]

Man U 0 Arsenal 1
VAR....disallowed

[Cirrus_Minor]

VAR again ruining the game

[Vegas Claret]

Why does Paul Tierney need 100 replays to decide a blatant foul ?

[Tricky Trevor]

WTF are these people on. Neville says it’s soft!
You can see Eriksens leg buckle and Odegaard has no contact with the ball. Has to be a foul.

[martin_p]

VAR again ruining the game

Hmmm… it was an obvious foul though. Looked a foul in real time.

[taio]

Why does Paul Tierney need 100 replays to decide a blatant foul ?

Agree - took too long again. One or possibly two replays was all that was needed.

[ClaretMat]

Correct decision that one.
Initially I thought Odegaard had managed to get his body in between Erikson and the ball. He hadn't and just completely bundled him over.

[ksrclaret]

Let's be honest now, there'll be something wrong with just about every ******* goal scored if we want to employ a computer system to look for it hard enough. Bit of contact there, could have gone either way, the ref saw nothing wrong in real time, not clear and obvious as it took ages and lots of different angles.

Football is shite now.

[taio]

VAR again ruining the game

It was correct to rule it out.

[dermotdermot]

Why does Paul Tierney need 100 replays to decide a blatant foul ?

And what on earth made him decide to shave his head? Doesn’t suit at all.

[martin_p]

Let's be honest now, there'll be something wrong with just about every ******* goal scored if we want to employ a computer system to look for it hard enough. Bit of contact there, could have gone either way, the ref saw nothing wrong in real time, not clear and obvious as it took ages and lots of different angles.

Football is shite now.

It was clear and obvious from the first replay. Think the ref was just making sure given the VAR disasters yesterday.

[Cirrus_Minor]

Maybe but it took the ref ten minutes of screen views to see it was clear and obvious

[KRBFC]

I'm all for slagging off VAR because I don't like it, but slagging it off after it makes a correct decision is just incredibly stupid. Use your brain fellas

[Vegas Claret]

And what on earth made him decide to shave his head? Doesn’t suit at all.

must admit I wondered who it was the first time I saw him this season

[ksrclaret]

I'm all for slagging off VAR because I don't like it, but slagging it off after it makes a correct decision is just incredibly stupid. Use your brain fellas

From the big kid creaming himself over being an internet football "expert" on another thread just now, that's a bit rich.

[Spijed]

Hull 0-2 Shef United.

Could do with them & Norwich slipping up soon.

[Vegas Claret]

Agree - took too long again. One or possibly two replays was all that was needed.

Do you not think it would benefit everyone if they brought in some sort of "allowed number of replays" ? ie, they are allowed 2 slow motion and 2 full speed replays to determine a clear and obvious ? Unless the sun is shining on the screen (then move the screen!) he should have clocked that on the first replay

[ksrclaret]

Penalty shout there. Monitor time?

[Vegas Claret]

Hull 0-2 Shef United.

Could do with them & Norwich slipping up soon.

Both very strong this season, the two with the best and most experienced squads. I would be very surprised if they aren't the top two at the end of the season

[SalisburyClaret]

Hull 0-2 Shef United.

Could do with them & Norwich slipping up soon.

Hull were really poor - but they do have a big injury list. Oscar looks a class player though

[ksrclaret]

Ey up, bit of a foul there. Monitor might be needed here.

[Taffy on the wing]

Why does Paul Tierney need 100 replays to decide a blatant foul ?

That was an extremely soft foul!
If you're going to call back goals for that, there will be a lot of 0-0 games

[KRBFC]

From the big kid creaming himself over being an internet football "expert" on another thread just now, that's a bit rich.

Just use your noggin.

Slagging VAR off after it makes a correct decision makes you look like a simpleton.

[Vegas Claret]

That was an extremely soft foul!
If you're going to call back goals for that, there will be a lot of 0-0 games

it's a non contact sport Taffy nowadays as was proven by the Cornet goal yesterday, in comparison to that 'foul' Odergaard should be charged with assault after that

[Vegas Claret]

Arsenal all over Utd

[martin_p]

Arsenal are looking really good so far this season.

[Taffy on the wing]

it's a non contact sport Taffy nowadays as was proven by the Cornet goal yesterday, in comparison to that 'foul' Odergaard should be charged with assault after that

I expect Lee Mason to be fired after this weekend......the game is ruined right now.

[SalisburyClaret]

it's a non contact sport Taffy nowadays as was proven by the Cornet goal yesterday, in comparison to that 'foul' Odergaard should be charged with assault after that

Yet at every corner all sorts of wrestling is allowed. Just inconsistent

[ksrclaret]

Just use your noggin.

Slagging VAR off after it makes a correct decision makes you look like a simpleton.

I don't like VAR whether it makes the right decision after another ref in a dark room has checked 10 replays or not. I liked football when VAR didn't interfere and sanitise the game.

I'll put the rude and unnecessary simpleton comment down to you coming down from your high of being right on the internet over Mitrovic. We've all got to get our moments of satisfaction from somewhere, I suppose.

[Vegas Claret]

I expect Lee Mason to be fired after this weekend......the game is ruined right now.

Howard Webb will have his work cut out when he takes over the PGMOL

[martin_p]

Arsenal are looking really good so far this season.

Well that was badly timed! 1-0 United.

[Vegas Claret]

proper smash and grab job, good finish though