• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Official 2016/17 Premier League Thread

mudshark said:
^^That was undeniably their best strategy, though, with Bravo threatening to do a Gomes at any moment. City by far the better footballing side, a well-deserved win.
Click to expand...
Probably but for the money they spent you'd expect more.

To be honest City really should have been out of sight. They broke on Utd a load of times in that second half and wasted their numerical advantage over and over.
 
Rorschach said:
Probably but for the money they spent you'd expect more.

To be honest City really should have been out of sight. They broke on Utd a load of times in that second half and wasted their numerical advantage over and over.
Click to expand...

I agree. Got into good positions but were too over-tentative. Neville said the same thing.
 
Kandi1977 said:
Indeed! It shouldn't matter really. Additionally, you can stare right at a situation, and still not perceive everything. I didn't see the Aguero elbow until the 3rd time I saw it. It happens all the time. Then again, overruling officials all the time can have a negative effect.
Click to expand...

I agree, but at the same time if we can give the referee some assurance and say 'we've got your back' then if the referee says; you know what, I need to see that again or have a second opinion, he should be allowed that.

Also if one of the teams used one of their three* challenges to see a replay and have it overturned I wouldn't object.

*three is open to discussion.
 
7percent said:
I agree, but at the same time if we can give the referee some assurance and say 'we've got your back' then if the referee says; you know what, I need to see that again or have a second opinion, he should be allowed that.

Also if one of the teams used one of their three* challenges to see a replay and have it overturned I wouldn't object.

*three is open to discussion.
Click to expand...
Teams should lose a sub for each incorrect challenge.
 
7percent said:
I agree, but at the same time if we can give the referee some assurance and say 'we've got your back' then if the referee says; you know what, I need to see that again or have a second opinion, he should be allowed that.

Also if one of the teams used one of their three* challenges to see a replay and have it overturned I wouldn't object.

*three is open to discussion.
Click to expand...

You'll get nowhere with sensible thinking like that.

The worst thing for the reputation of referees is that when they are considered to have seen an incident, even when it is obvious that they missed the critical part of the incident, that the decision is irrevocable. They are trapped in acceptance of a bad decision, regardless of the evidence. If they had the option of admitting that they missed the elbow or whatever they would have far more respect.

Some sort of technological help is just so obviously needed, both for the credibility of the game and the referees. A challenge system makes a lot of sense.
 
paxtonwolf said:
Listening to 5live on the way home, you would think they are the first club to ever have a new stand built. It was 6 o'clock before i realised the match had kicked off they were w#nking off that much about good the stand was, and how amazing Anfield sounds
Click to expand...
Anything the media can cling onto to carry on with the obssession !!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back