Ric

It is the human element of all this, not the technology, that is the causes of that. I fully support people complaining about the time VAR takes, the subjects which it will and won't review, how the 4th officials (or VAR assistants) make their observations known (or not) and why a referee can look at a very clear instance of cheating yet ignore that evidence and rely on their own instincts. Ultimately though, when you strip it down to its component parts, the technology VAR uses is more precise and accurate than any human can be, and that tech will only improve. What needs to improve along with it is the officiating, and it's fucking criminal for the SPFL to introduce VAR mid way through a season when it's clear their officials were not ready for it's introduction.

If anything it is the opposite of being tory. Being tory means making decisions that go against the facts and blatantly ignoring any protests.

So just ditch it and replace it with people in the Sportscene studio reviewing the video pointing out the error 5 hours later? That's what happened before. I see no reason for the referee not to be shown that replay at the very time when they can influence the play if that replay is available. At least you know that the referee has had the ability to look at it again and it rules out the "honest mistake" excuse that used to be trotted out when the ref refused to give a blatant penalty against the OF. Is it VARs fault that the law states any contact with the hand from the goal scorer rules out the goal? It is FIFA that decides that shit, yet VAR is blamed because it has video showing the hand being hit. No, I find the whole "ditch it, we were better off before" attitude akin to people smashing spinning Jennys. The technology isn't going away, and in fact it's only going to get better. It is infinitely better at being able to identify offside or fouls than referees as has been shown. No, the weak link in the chain is not the tech, it's the officials, their ability to understand and interpret the rules and those who are making the rules and not understanding how VAR will reflect those changes.

VAR is fine, it's the officials making the rulings that is at fault. Remove VAR and you will still have dodgy decisions and delays. All VAR does is provide more clarity in situations. It absolutely should not take 4 or 5 minutes for the officials to make a decision, and static images should not be the sole arbiter, but those are all faults of the officials not the technology.

Here's a bit of fun, I don't know who the ref or the VAR assistant(s) is/are, but which do you think it'll be... Ref/VAR plays no part in determining the final score. Ref/VAR benefits the home team. Ref/VAR benefits the away team. Ref/VAR negatively benefits both teams. Me? I'm going #2, purely because it's the only way Dundee can win, but I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out #4.

Oh, now.. that's good. Well done.

Let's hope we choose the black shorts today then!

You'll need to speak up, can't quite hear you from all the way down there..

However, less of that nonsense, let us all revel in Shaughnessy heading past Carson for our first in a 2-1 victory. 1.mp4

I wouldn't put much stock in the category I used, it was clearly not intended to be anything other than a shit post. I also hope you don't think I am in some way lessening the impact of domestic abuse. If you do, I could explain a few things (in DM) as to why that would never be the case.

You are right to highlight how Dundee ruined him. It's only once he received Robinson's tutelage has he been able to really develop.

Literally Dundee's two best players are our cast offs, so....

"antagonistic , hostile , or unfriendly toward others; menacing" ..that said, if the categorisation is an issue, provide me with an alternative and I'll edit the post.

Johnny, Johnny, Johnny... considering the number of Dundee fans VT has virtually ragdolled on here, I'd take that as a compliment..

Struggling for relevance here, PD. I'm spitting facts, you are throwing out pseudo science.. Also, where have I defended Paisley? It seems you've gotten your jimmies so rustled you've assumed this was a zero-sum game! Edit: btw, get yourself an ad-blocker there, chum, that's just friendly advice!

Did you actually read the article before posting this "hopeful gotcha"? That's some science right there!

Seeing as this thread is already a dumpster fire, I'll just leave these here... Crime Drugs Anti-Social Behaviour "thank you"

You can make any excuse you want for it, but the facts are the facts, he was so bad with Kilmarnock last season he had to be dropped. Go back and watch his games. If he can suffer confidence issues, once, then he can suffer them again. We would be having the same discussion if we had brought an outfield player who had suffered the same fate. If people are sitting there thinking I am criticising him unfairly and will never recognise if he has a good game clearly never read my comments. I said the same for Curtis Main, who was an absolute embarrassment for us for months, months. Did he come good in the end? Yes, he did. Did I call him out when he was being dogshit? Yes, I did. Did I call him out for his excellent performances last season? Yes, yes I did. Do I want him to be a success? Of course I do. The biggest thing is how he reacts to his mistakes, because keepers who make none (just like any player who makes no mistakes) are as rare as hens teeth. Robinson is the person who makes the call, it's his job on the line, and considering his success with us last season he has earned the right to make those decisions. Personally I think he was blindsided by Carson's tantrum and limited by our budget, so he's had to lean into the Hemming as #1 out of circumstance rather than desire. Bottom line is that we all have opinions, but that's all they are. I don't get annoyed at people bigging up Hemming, because... people certainly have, yet people seem to get annoyed when I am less ebullient. The only arbiter here will be the end of the season, when we have a much better idea of how good (or bad) he'll be. Again, though, I obviously wish for a positive outcome.

You are being very selective there. For a start it wasn't "one incident", as I posted links to his performances for Killie where he failed to command his box when he joined us. He had a nightmare for them last season and had to be replaced. That's the reason I am concerned about him being #1. It's not some sort of unfair agenda against the lad. Is it his fault he is #1? No, of course not, it's Carson's for having a tantrum. Do I blame him for taking the opportunity, again, of course not. It is Robinson that's made the call, and it's his job on the line so I presume he must trust him, but that doesn't stop people having an opinion on what they see. Secondly, as for him being a step down, he is, you simply cannot argue the case. Part of that is because we have been very lucky with our keepers recently. Is he a better keeper than Hladky, Alnwick or Carson? If you think so, then that is a crazy take. The keeper we had before that was (iirc) Samson. Is he better than Samson? Perhaps, that's a different argument. The biggest thing for me is for Hemming to learn from his mistakes. Keepers have mistakes "baked into them", it's how they react that is important, and we won't really know that until the team experiences a tough period of results. Finally, when he's had a good game, I've said he's had a good game. Feel free to check my comments.

Don't they already have two?

Kettlewell is a great manager, while you'd expect Hibs to stick with Gray if he keeps winning.

"still at it" Calm yourself.

Not me. I never even saw the game. As I said, I didn't watch the game so can't comment. IMO, we've been very lucky with keepers, but Hemming is definitely a step down. Admittedly this isn't really anyone's fault other than Carson for throwing his toys out of the pram.

You are right, in general, that we do need to improve our away form as last season I think it was a total of 3 wins on the road. That said, we still made the top 6 with that record.

I admire the confidence!