Spain (a) in October

[Jambomo]

1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Remember a decade of two back, long before VAR when 'level' got changed from offside to onside.  

It represented a psychological alteration as much as a physical one.  It favoured the attacker and meant a presumption of onside unless very clearly otherwise.

VAR has reversed that psychological dimension, and I'm having a hard time believing that that's what it was introduced for.

Agreed. I know that it was meant to stop attackers hanging around the penalty box but at this point, I think hanging round the penalty box is a much lesser evil that what we have now, people being offside running away from the goal because their heel is past the defender and other such nonsense. It’s definitely not what the rule was brought in for. 

[DA Baracus]

8 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

The existence of VAR itself isn't the problem. The application of it is.

VAR should reduce mistakes made by officials, but it has a fatal law by being itself entirely reliant on other officials not making mistakes.

Nah, VAR is the problem. It's shit and isn't needed. It adds nothing to games and actively takes much away from it.

[Monkey Tennis]

Just now, DA Baracus said:

Nah, VAR is the problem. It's shit and isn't needed. It adds nothing to games and actively takes much away from it.

I think its application should be only an occasional thing, for a clear refereeing howler, or a screaming injustice, such as the Henry handball against Ireland.

The technology has existed for decades, for TV to subsequently show that officials had got things wrong.  We lived with that, fine.  

We don't need this picking apart of borderline incidents.  We're losing more than we're gaining here.

Admittedly though, I had fewer objections when Dykes scored against Israel, or when we got a penalty in Vienna.

[Jaggy McJagface]

13 minutes ago, Zetterlund said:

Nah, I can't see Spain fecking it up there when it'd mean a real chance they'd go out.

If Spain had pretty much qualified already then I'd have the fear.

I think that unless they get beat by more than 3 against Norway then maximum points from their last two (Georgia at home, Cyprus away) will see them qualified.

[Skyline Drifter]

3 hours ago, kingjoey said:

 

You've changed your tune.

Those two posts are entirely consistent with each other. No idea what you think you're reading but you're wrong. I've not changed my tune one bit. Its not a foul, he is offside.

Edited October 13, 2023 by Skyline Drifter

[Jambomo]

14 minutes ago, she.IVNA.Sevilla said:

Hello, are there any Scottish fans still in Seville?

They’ll all be face down in a paella somewhere. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

37 minutes ago, Lurkst said:

I'm starting to fear we might be looking for a result in Tbilisi now too 

 

That's why I want either a Spanish win or a draw on Sunday.

[Skyline Drifter]

33 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Remember a decade of two back, long before VAR when 'level' got changed from offside to onside.  

It represented a psychological alteration as much as a physical one.  It favoured the attacker and meant a presumption of onside unless very clearly otherwise.

VAR has reversed that psychological dimension, and I'm having a hard time believing that that's what it was introduced for.

Er, no. Level has always been onside.

Do you mean when they changed to 'give the benefit of any doubt to the attacker'? 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

2 hours ago, Willie adie said:

From listening on the wireless, we were lucky to have held it at 0-0 for so long.

So there is a case for saying Spain were the deserved winners.

But we all know that keepers get so much protection it's laughable, 

VAR is something football spent decades demanding, and probably justifyably, but it's the usage of it, and way it seems to be down to interpretation and opinion that is the issue,

And the lack of transparency and communication.

 

They could learn a lot from Rugby - the conversation between a referee and the TMO is absolutely transparent - and it is absolutely clear why a try is awarded (or not).

If football did something similar then we probably wouldn't be arguing about the non-goal today.

[moniton]

22 minutes ago, she.IVNA.Sevilla said:

Hello, are there any Scottish fans still in Seville?

Disappointing that nobody has suggested the traditional p&b “boot in the paella “ for this bot 

[HeartsOfficialMoaner]

Why didn't Hendry step out? He just forgot? He is playing like it is a corner. He will know better next time. It's a shame because the goal is brilliant. Nakamura would be proud of that one, Del Piero also. It was that good.

 

 

[Guest]

Draw between the dirty cheating b*****ds and Norway on Sunday please.

[Donathan]

55 minutes ago, kennie makevin said:

From what we saw last night Norway are beating Spain in Oslo...so we should still qualify as group winners

I’m not sure we want that. It would be good to go into the November window playing for the group win/seeding alone, safe in the knowledge that we’ve qualified.

 

Spain now 3 points behind us with a game in hand, equal H2H record and a far better goal difference. If they win their remaining matches they’ll finish above us (and their last two are Georgia home and Cyprus away who they both beat by six in September)

 

However, Norway are five points behind us with each having two games left. We won the first H2H matchup 2-1 and have a better goal difference. If Norway drop any points or if we win in Georgia, then they can’t catch us.

 

Unless Norway absolutely hammer Spain on Sunday, then a point in Georgia would mean even a one goal defeat to Norway would suit us.

 

Objectively we want Norway v Spain to be a draw. That would mean we’ve qualified but would put the group win back into our own hands. 

[accies1874]

29 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I think its application should be only an occasional thing, for a clear refereeing howler, or a screaming injustice, such as the Henry handball against Ireland.

The technology has existed for decades, for TV to subsequently show that officials had got things wrong.  We lived with that, fine.  

We don't need this picking apart of borderline incidents.  We're losing more than we're gaining here.

 

I completely agree with you, but the argument will be that if they're stopping the game anyway then they might as well check everything else involved in a goal. Spanish folk would have been just as raging as we are had McTominay's goal been allowed to stand. 

Quote

Admittedly though, I had fewer objections when Dykes scored against Israel, or when we got a penalty in Vienna.

Off the top of my head, we might actually be in the negative for VAR decisions now. We "gained" those two you've mentioned, but lost the goal last night, a penalty against Ukraine (which definitely wasn't a penalty) and Moldova got a penalty against us through VAR. Means we're entitled to complain about it now imo. 

[The Moonster]

7 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

 

And I dont agree with the assertion even @craigkillie made that the ball was going in anyway. I think if Hendry's not in his way he probably claws that away. I certainly dont think you can definitively say he doesn't. 

The ball is in the net before the keeper has a fucking clue what's gone on. He doesn't even try and push Hendry out the way, just stands there and watches the ball fly by him, but you want me to believe that if Hendry is step further back he's coming out and punching or clawing that away? Give us peace man. 

[O'Kelly Isley III]

1 hour ago, houston_bud said:

Spot on. It's now completely impossible for an attacking player to look along the line and know if he's on or offside.

I can't fathom how those in charge of the game think this is an improvement. 

Well exactly this.  Was football at any level that broken that we needed VAR to fix it ?  On all available evidence the answer must now be no.

And it's not just the mounting controversies and irregularities, it is also the impact on the game as a playing and spectator sport - it is literally killing the moment.  Who ever wanted a wait of six minutes before they could celebrate a goal, or now has absolutely no confidence that the 'moment' everyone just witnessed will be remembered for what it was rather than the subsequent analysis and often unsatisfactory outcome ?

We are also at times living in a parallel universe where my phone tells me that Palace are 1-0 up at Burnley, only for it to be 0-0 when I check 20 minutes later - WTF is that all about ?

My team might be a diddy one but I'm very glad we don't (yet) have to endure the crap that is VAR.  Time for a serious rethink.

[Bairnardo]

27 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

They’ll all be face down in a paella somewhere. 

Thats a very persistent bot. Now sending PM's aswell. Just going to set myself up with a breakfast date.....

[Scary Bear]

1 hour ago, Diamonds are Forever said:

 

Can we accept goals that are half a centimetre over the goal line? Or give penalties that are half a centimetre inside the penalty box? Or should we have a similar blasé attitude to those too?

It's not about 'what the rule is for', you need to have a consistent standard otherwise you have no rules. Is 2 centimetres offside okay? What about 5? What about 20? Or is that being picky too? At some point you need to draw the line, how offside do you think someone needs to be before they are actually offside?

There is a very valid debate to be had about the reliability of the technology and how much weight we should put on it, but basically just saying he's only a wee bit offside so it doesn't count is ridiculous.

 

That would go back to the ‘clear and obvious’ argument. At the moment VAR is just nitpicking for the sake of it and it spoils great moments like McTominays goal. 

[Lex]

Just now, Scary Bear said:

That would go back to the ‘clear and obvious’ argument. At the moment VAR is just nitpicking for the sake of it and it spoils great moments like McTominays goal. 

I think he’s factually offside and the argument is just whether he’s interfering with play or not. Given he’s literally put his hands on the goalie when the ball is in play it’s a tough argument to say he’s not interfering with play. If that kind of thing was allowed you’d have attacking players standing in offside positions putting the goalie off at every free kick. 
The ref then making the wrong hand signal afterwards certainly hasn’t helped matters. 

[Donathan]

7 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Thats a very persistent bot. Now sending PM's aswell. Just going to set myself up with a breakfast date.....

Legitimate but desperate prostitute rather than a bot IMO