Jim McLean's Ghost
-
Posts
7,963 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Jim McLean's Ghost
-
-
Jak is looking a bit sick out there.
1 -
people with monday night tickets can probably start making other plans
0 -
11 minutes ago, Claudia Gentile said:
0 -
Will VAR pull that back for the foul by Dessers?
0 -
That is pretty shite from Will Dennis. Got to get that one pushed out of the 6 yard box
0 -
Just now, Mark Connolly said:
The post was nothing to do with VAR. It was showing how it was possible to have a rule governing handball that did not require a foul or a card to be given in absolutely every instance.
I'm glad you accepted your initial response was wrong though.
But that rule already exists in football. It isn't a foul simply for the ball to touch a player's hand or arm.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:
It really isn't.
It actually states it in the rules
In practice in proper top level games any engaged defender is penalised if it hits their foot. i guess if someone was running away and the ball was hit into them it wouldn't be an offense. So you are correct. But Hockey is not the example to bring up for VAR staying out the way. As well as ref VAR reviews, teams can initiate their own reviews and there is a lot of minute details looked at.
0 -
1 minute ago, Mark Connolly said:
The equivalent in hockey is the ball hitting the foot. In normal play, it's only a foul if the player gains an advantage from it, or it prevents the opposition from gaining an advantage, and it's only a card if it's done deliberately. It seems complex in writing, but in practice works really well, and is far more simple than "unnatural position" and "silhouettes".
In that case, the penalty would have been awarded, but Wright wouldn't have received a card, which seems a far more sensible outcome.
Nah in hockey it is always a free hit if the ball hits the foot and a penalty corner if it happens in the circle. Zero leniency.
0 -
As much as the VAR has been seemingly looking for decisions for Rangers the penalty and red card are the correct decisions in the LAWS OF THE GAME.
Wright only has himself to blame for not dealing with the ball in the box. He hesitated and it cost him big time.
1 -
Cracking save.
Tav not having a good day
0 -
Potentially also a red card for handball on the line
0 -
I think Silva is on and this might be a pen....
0 -
Book Cantwell. for that shit.
0 -
Someone rip out the the VAP equipment right now.
Absolutely nothing wrong no matter how desperately the VAR wants it to be
1 -
1 minute ago, LuboMoravcik said:
Looked like it hit his forearm to me. But it was never a penalty.
Maybe on one foreshortened angle from directly behind. From the side angles it looks like it hit his side. Inconclusive
OOFFF
Wtf happened there.
#SUPERKILLIEAWAY
0 -
This will be another farce
0 -
I don't think it was even clear it hit the defender's hand
0 -
7 minutes ago, well fan for life said:
Why the f**k do we give goal of the season before the end of the season. Idiots.
Goals that go in off the bar >>>>
If Theo had connected on the overhead kick they would have needed to redo the award
8 -
If this match actually meant something there would be about 10 minutes on Sportscene wondering wtf was going on with VAR today.
4-1 comfortable. Mathematically safe now. Not much more to say other than some hit from nicholson
1 -
"Score.... oh no wide."
Great commentary. Inject it
1 -
10 hours ago, Swello said:
Has the guy got any history buying and selling land in his line of business? (genuine question).
One thing I've always been sceptical about (more widely, not just us) - if buying and selling land for profit was your business plan, why in the name of f**k would you complicate your life by putting a top flight football club in the middle of your deal? There are lots of pieces of land about, and most of them don't come with a bunch of rabid lunatics opposing your every move and all the negative publicity and hassle that goes with it. If you wanted to make a return on land development, it would be one of the very worst ways to go about it.
The problem would be if we were to get into debt and selling fir park and moving to a much lesser stadium as a solution.
There is a history of teams moving from the centre of town out to the outskirts. It happened with Falkirk, St Mirren, Inverness, St Johnstone.
I don't think there is some mastermind plan to sell up Fir Park but I think the danger is there none the less.
0 -
4 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:
There seems to be some myth that Bruce McDiarmid granting the land to Saints about 40 years ago was some blood oath that it's only there for football. It's just land the club owns. By all accounts they own land at other sites too.
As far as I'm aware the new road is a good boundary, aye. There's a massive chunk of land that's hidden by bushes that has nothing on it. They've got planning permission for flats and have done for years, but it's looked at as perfect for a "community hub".
It'll likely just be a mini sports centre. Saints in the Community currently host a huge amount of training sessions throughout the week for a variety of age groups at the stadium, but the indoor part is limited. Presumably they'd plan to build a bigger indoor pitch for that. They've talked about wanting a place to provide more community based projects that aren't just "kick a ball about too", so it might provide them room for classrooms.
You can attach covenants to land for usage. It is not unheard of. Need to get John Brown down to demand to see The Deeds. Not to take Stuart Cosgrove as gospel but there was a segment one time on Off the Ball about sponsor names for grounds and he said Saintees could ot change the name as part of the agreement when the land was transferred so it seems Farmer McDiarmid was thinking ahead.
The land around McDiarmid must be worth a tidy amount now. The sprawl of Perth has moved right out to the A9 with development even starting on the other side. Selling the currently vacant land for development seems like a good way to generate some cash. With all the houses built round about it is strange that the nothing has been built on your patch.
Would you be surprised if there was a clause that limited it to recreational use? And if there are no restrictions then the value of the club must be massively boosted by having all that space.
Accounting the value of the stadium is a big deal for me in the proposed take over of motherwell. Selling out to some American puts the future of Fir Park at risk.
0 -
Never a pen. Dortmund player just mistimed his jump
0 -
2 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:
Is he just like that then?
Seems convinced the empty land near McDiarmid is some hidden flaw and will f**k us, when the reality is it's earmarked for a "community hub" which will be built and owned by the "Saints in the community" organisation, and funded by the sale of the club (Geoff Brown is handing the proceeds from the sale to them so they can afford it).
Don't St Johstone has some weird covenant on the land/stadium?
How much of the land around the stadium do the club own? is the whole site bound by the new road? It does seem like there is a good opportunity to build houses up at the top end of the site.
What would a community hub entail? Like some changing rooms and hall for the pitches behind the stand?
0
#Barclays 23/24
in Misc Other Fitba Chat
Posted
Would be a good laugh if Chelsea finish ahead of Ange's spurs.