Aston Villa Vs Arsenal | Saturday December 9 1730

[The Wengerbabies]

6 pointer. Must win.

[Marc Overmars]

Big game. If Villa beat us you’d probably have to consider them as title contenders.

Looking forward to this. Really good test for us, they’ve won 14 in a row at home so we need to be at our best to get anything.

[Letters]

It isn't a must win. I don't even think those exist this early in the season.
I fear for us after what Villa did to City last night, I haven't seen City dominated like that in a long time.
We'd do well to get a point and I'd take that right now.

[Mac76]

Losing Tomi is a big blow, Zin will be taken to the cleaners by Villa in this game if he starts

I didn't see Villa v Citeh, all you could say is look at our results compared to theirs and we have more chance

I'd play Ram ofc but there's no chance of that, Villa will be all over Raya

3-0 Watkins hatter (and it really could happen this time...)

[HCZ_Reborn]

It isn't a must win. I don't even think those exist this early in the season.
I fear for us after what Villa did to City last night, I haven't seen City dominated like that in a long time.
We'd do well to get a point and I'd take that right now.

This also has to be put in the perspective that City hadn’t won any of their three previous league games and were low on confidence, and missing the player who is so crucial to them in Rodri.

Their midfield just wasn’t up to it last night. Dont get me wrong, Villa is going to be the toughest away game we’ve faced all season. I think we have to be playing Jorginho and Rice to keep things tight especially with Tomiyasu injured. But I do think with the way Villa come forward, there’s space to exploit in behind them…Martinez is a mixed bag he’s either brilliant or shite.

I think with how tight things are at the moment and because of our next game after this being at Anfield, it is a must win. A draw won’t be awful, but it might not be good enough

[Letters]

If Villa were top and we were, say, 6 points behind them then I think you could declare it a must win to keep us in touch. But this early on the season with us on top, nah - there's too much football to be played, too many twists and turns to come. But a win would be a big statement, given their home record and form.

[The Wengerbabies]

It isn't a must win. I don't even think those exist this early in the season.

That's a loser mentality.

[Letters]

That's a loser mentality.

No, it's maths.

[HCZ_Reborn]

No, it's maths.

Mathematically if we don’t win and Liverpool do, they go top.

Fuck all the twists and turns in the season stuff, we want to be in control of our own destiny so this makes it a must win

[Letters]

Mathematically if we don’t win and Liverpool do, they go top.
Yes. The table would look like this if we lose and the other results go the way we don't want:

Liverpool 37
Arsenal 36
Villa 35
City 33

We'd be a point off the top. Less than half way through the season. Are you saying that if we lose it wouldn't be possible to win the league? By that logic Liverpool can't win it now. But of course they can.
Right now you just want to keep in touch.


Fuck all the twists and turns in the season stuff, we want to be in control of our own destiny so this makes it a must win

Nah. To me a "must win" is a game where if you lose or even draw it, it makes winning the title impossible or at least improbable. This isn't one of those. No game is this early.
What we can say is that a win would be a real "statement".

EDIT: We would still be in control of our destiny if we lose, we still have to play Liverpool.

[HCZ_Reborn]

So basically what you’re saying is your definition of a must win game is different. Yes so failing to win at Villa makes going to Anfield a must win game.

No I don’t say that it’s impossible to win the title without win at Villa, but it’s the kind of place we should be winning if we do want to win the title. So in terms of our own destiny (where we can stay top with just a draw at Anfield) winning on Saturday and winning the following Sunday at home to Brighton is a must.

I think we had a chance to lay down a marker by winning at Newcastle and we utterly failed to do that. With the exception of the City game at home, we haven’t had a real marquee victory and it’s time.

If we lose or draw it’s not the end, but it’s a massive chance missed

[Letters]

So basically what you’re saying is your definition of a must win game is different.
Yes.


Yes so failing to win at Villa makes going to Anfield a must win game.
Well, possibly. Those two games aren't consecutive. A draw in both would probably not be fatal, especially as we have both Villa and Liverpool at home later in the season.

Either would certainly be a statement win, I think we can agree on that.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Yes.


Well, possibly. Those two games aren't consecutive. A draw in both would probably not be fatal, especially as we have both Villa and Liverpool at home later in the season.

Either would certainly be a statement win, I think we can agree on that.


I’m looking at it in terms of being top and wanting to stay top, and that no matter how well Villa played yesterday…it’s definitely going to be an easier place for us to go than Anfield. Drawing both would not be fatal to our title chances I agree, but if we want to stay top I think we really need to beat Villa and Brighton.

[Letters]

I guess I'm just less fussed about staying on top at this stage of the season, we were top for almost all of last season and it didn't do us much good in the end.
Right now we just need to stay in touch. It's what happens at the business end that counts.
But I am a fan of "statement" wins so one at Villa Park or Anfield could be important in that regard. It was a massive red flag to me when we lost to City at home last season.

[Mac76]

My concern with leaving it late in the season is that it's where I think Arteta is weakest, all his chickens come home to roost as they did last season when lack of rotation tired the team out and no change in tactics made us easier to draw against or beat

So we need to build ourselves a cushion, even that won't gaurantee anything but I'm concerned we aren't a side that will finish strongly, unlike Citeh

[The Wengerbabies]

No, it's maths.

Spoken like a loser.

[Letters]

Spoken like a loser.

Boring troll is trolling. Boringly.

[Mac76]

22Raya
4White
2Saliba
6Gabriel
35Zinchenko
8Ødegaard
41Rice
29Havertz
7Saka
9Gabriel Jesus
11Martinelli

Substitutes

1Ramsdale
14Nketiah
15Kiwior
17Cédric Soares
19Trossard
20Jorginho
24Nelson
25Elneny
76Walters

Predictable lineup although i'd have had Kiwior, Ram and Trossatd instead of Raya, Zin and Havertz

[HCZ_Reborn]

Kiwior was our worst outfield player on Tuesday wouldn’t have him back in the starting line up

Havertz deserves to be starting (for the time being)

[McNamara That Ghost...]

Trossard was poor when he came on against Luton, doesn't deserve this one for me.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Trossard was poor when he came on against Luton, doesn't deserve this one for me.

I thought he played ok, just wasn’t happening for him. But I think Havertz deserves the start

[HCZ_Reborn]

Villa bossing things in the early stages

[McNamara That Ghost...]

Saka scuffer.

[McNamara That Ghost...]

1-0 McGinn.

[Marc Overmars]

I think we might be in for a pasting.

[Mac76]

I'm out somewhere so not watching but a goal after 7 mins :rolleyes: was it down our left hand side by any chance...?

[HCZ_Reborn]

Certainly haven’t lacked chances to level things

[McNamara That Ghost...]

Fairly comfortable for Villa really.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Fuck sake. No way we deserved to lose that game.

[Letters]

Fuck sake. No way we deserved to lose that game.
I didn’t see any of it so can’t comment, but it’s disappointing to concede so early and have all that time to score and then…not. From what you say we should have scored, but “should have” doesn’t get you points. It’s worrying how we’ve failed to score in the bigger away games so far this year.

[HCZ_Reborn]

I didn’t see any of it so can’t comment, but it’s disappointing to concede so early and have all that time to score and then…not. From what you say we should have scored, but “should have” doesn’t get you points. It’s worrying how we’ve failed to score in the bigger away games so far this year.


Doesn’t help when a blatant penalty doesn’t get given. When we equalise and it’s ruled out for handball after it hits Matt Cash’s hand as well as Havertz. And where they get away with an elbow in the face.


Dont get me wrong we should have been more clinical. But there’s no doubt the better team lost.

[HCZ_Reborn]

As far as I’m concerned the lack of a penalty award is bigger robbery than the Newcastle game

They gave an identical incident as a penalty for palace earlier in the day

[Letters]

I might have a look later if I’ve stopped sulking.

[The Wengerbabies]

As far as I’m concerned the lack of a penalty award is bigger robbery than the Newcastle game

They gave an identical incident as a penalty for palace earlier in the day


I think it would have been fairly soft to get a pen for that but as you say and Carragher did too Liverpool got a similar one earlier, I haven't seen it but if true the consistency is a fucking shambles once again.

That guy should have been sent off for elbowing Nketkiah, you can see him turn his head to look for Eddie before elbowing him ffs.

The disallowed goal was a disgrace too, I didn't seen Havertz handball it? I did see the Villa defender handball it first though.

Cunts.

We do need to be more clinical though we should have got something despite all the above.

[HCZ_Reborn]

I think it would have been fairly soft to get a pen for that but as you say and Carragher did too Liverpool got a similar one earlier, I haven't seen it but if true the consistency is a fucking shambles once again.

That guy should have been sent off for elbowing Nketkiah, you can see him turn his head to look for Eddie before elbowing him ffs.

The disallowed goal was a disgrace too, I didn't seen Havertz handball it? I did see the Villa defender handball it first though.

Cunts.

We do need to be more clinical though we should have got something despite all the above.


I think it was a nailed on penalty, none of the ball was got and it took Jesus off balance


But as for the rest totally agree

[Niall_Quinn]

Guys, check the betting odds in Phnom Penh if you want to know the results in advance.

[Mac76]

We can moan about pels etc but expecting to win at Villa when you start with Zin and Havertz is always going to be optimistic, our team has too many self-inflicted flaws to win the league

[HCZ_Reborn]

We can moan about pels etc but expecting to win at Villa when you start with Zin and Havertz is always going to be optimistic, our team has too many self-inflicted flaws to win the league

Proof that you didn’t watch the game. Havertz was again one of our better players. In terms of missed chances the biggest culprit was Odegaard.

Zinchenko was peripheral but given after the half hour mark Villa were almost constantly on the back foot, it didn’t really matter

[The Wengerbabies]

We can moan about pels etc but expecting to win at Villa when you start with Zin and Havertz is always going to be optimistic, our team has too many self-inflicted flaws to win the league


That's why I said despite all that we still should have got something. I'm not moaning about it it's just ridiculous.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Guys, check the betting odds in Phnom Penh if you want to know the results in advance.

I think they are more involved in what’s app romance/bitcoin scams. Russia and China are still your go to’s for football betting scams

[Mac76]

Proof that you didn’t watch the game. Havertz was again one of our better players. In terms of missed chances the biggest culprit was Odegaard.

Zinchenko was peripheral but given after the half hour mark Villa were almost constantly on the back foot, it didn’t really matter

Yes, fair enough i didn't watch so was making that comment blind but still i don't think they were the best options pre-game with Kiwior and Trossard available , but sure I can't prove it

[HCZ_Reborn]

Yes, fair enough i didn't watch so was making that comment blind but still i don't think they were the best options pre-game with Kiwior and Trossard available , but sure I can't prove it

Kiwior was awful at left back

And Trossard wasn’t great when he came on


If Tomiyasu was fit, yeah doubtless I’d pick him over Zinchenko. But on current form i don’t think I’d have picked Trossard over Havertz

[Letters]

Guys, check the betting odds in Phnom Penh if you want to know the results in advance.

Well why not tell us so we can all make some money then?

[Marc Overmars]

Didn’t see the game but it’s not really a surprising result.

Hopefully bounce back next week against Brighton before the inevitable disaster at Anfield.

[selassie]

Games like yesterday give me doubts that I don't think we can win the league. We got most right yesterday, we didn't play well, but we didn't play badly either, despite that we totally controlled the game for the best part of an hour after the half hour mark. We simply weren't ruthless enough. Odegaard alone could have won us that game with the 2 relatively easy chances he fluffed, in fact one of them was a sitter. I thought Jesus should have had a penalty, the same thing happened in the Palace v Liverpool game and Palace were awarded a penalty, not sure why the rule appears to change when it was us yesterday. Havertz goal ruled out was correct even though I think the handball rule in that context is misused. But whatever....we have a difficult game next up against Brighton at home which is "MUST WIN", followed by the Liverpool away game on the 23rd which is a "MUST NOT LOSE".

[Letters]

Games like yesterday give me doubts that I don't think we can win the league. We got most right yesterday, we didn't play well, but we didn't play badly either, despite that we totally controlled the game for the best part of an hour after the half hour mark. We simply weren't ruthless enough. Odegaard alone could have won us that game with the 2 relatively easy chances he fluffed, in fact one of them was a sitter. I thought Jesus should have had a penalty, the same thing happened in the Palace v Liverpool game and Palace were awarded a penalty, not sure why the rule appears to change when it was us yesterday. Havertz goal ruled out was correct even though I think the handball rule in that context is misused. But whatever....we have a difficult game next up against Brighton at home which is "MUST WIN", followed by the Liverpool away game on the 23rd which is a "MUST NOT LOSE".

:gp:

Agreed on all counts. There were a few games last year where I thought "if we win this game then I reckon we'll win the league" and we didn't win one of them. Yesterday was possibly one of those. I feel a bit better having seen the highlights. Villa took City apart. They didn't do that to us, on another day we could have won it or certainly got a point. The lack of a clinical striker is a known problem. The penalty was one of those "if that's anywhere else on the pitch then it's a foul" ones, so why wasn't it a penalty? I don't buy into any "anti-Arsenal" conspiracy, some things go for you, some go against. It's natural to focus on the latter and forget the former. But I would say that it's increasingly clear that VAR isn't working, it was interesting to see Lineker say much the same thing. Ultimately, you don't win the title in December. If you're there or thereabouts around Easter then you have a chance. So far we're in the mix and that's enough for now. But we have to win next week and yes, a loss at Anfield while maybe not fatal would be a big red flag.

[Niall_Quinn]

I think they are more involved in what’s app romance/bitcoin scams. Russia and China are still your go to’s for football betting scams

Chose the most obscure place to imply everyone is doing it. Except the hapless English fans who still think it's a sport. Absolutely anything and everything that has a revenue stream attached that exceeds 50 pence is now corrupt. Totally, overtly corrupt. In your face. It's an actual business model and the most "respectable" are far worse than the legacy rogues, who probably don't know what the fuck has happened.

Take the disallowed legitimate goal. A Villa player "handballs" it in the box, mostly because the ball randomly deflected onto his arm. So, by the standards applied by the compromised individuals posing as authority figures, penalty, right? Then the ball randomly ricochets off the Arsenal player's arm. So, by the double standards applied by the compromised individuals posing as authority figures, disallowed, right? Well, it all depends on the betting odds. Wouldn't be surprised if the VAR team have a direct feed to the markets that matter.

In days gone by when sport was sport, the ref wouldn't have even seen all the bobbles and bounces and the goal would be allowed. And later, some fuck like Neville or Lineker would slo-mo the whole routine and add some spice by claiming it should have been disallowed. And the fans from one team would have said, on no it shouldn't. And the other lot would have said, oh yes it should. But the tiny little bullshit things that now get picked up (selectively) by VAR would have been brushed away in the moment. Because human mistakes occure and are expected. Whereas VAR mistakes are fully intended.

[Niall_Quinn]

Jeez, seems like none of you watched it. And for once, I did. At least some of it. Was so boring I had to take breaks.

Obviously the best team didn't win. Mainly because they have decided to tackle the season without a striker, but also - as usual - because the officials were blatantly corrupt. Not the ones on the pitch, I don't think. Although they probably were on standby if needed. But the cosy little rig squad they have set up in booths who can wave a wand and justify the ridiculous with the support of Should-Be-Sacked-For-Being-Unprofessional-Gary types.

For those that didn't watch, most of the match involved Arsenal players tapping it around aimlessly and playing at a super low, almost stealing a living, tempo. Excruciating. Meanwhile the opposition have a very well drilled offside trap that becomes particularly hilarious when the poor old lino can't raise his flag until something other than the offside offense happens.

And that was about it.

Other than a bit of poor defending and a perfectly good goal that was disallowed because some Asian blioke bet big.

As far as football goes, not much to see. Eddie is a tragic figure, yet still the leading scorer along with Saka, who mostly enjoys rolling on the ground and screaming like a bitch. Not sure what all the fuss is about that Rice bloke. Some of us have seen Vieira play, in the flesh. I saw somebody making a comparison the other day. Anything for attention, eh?

The team misses Xhaka, a lot. He was a basic player, but at least he had that in his locker. And Auba is a big miss too, leaving all the other to literally miss big. That Odegard bloke is a complete waste of space. For every "wonderfully cultured" thing he does, he fucks up 5 times. He's the captain, right?

Can't understand the hate for the gypo full back. He's one of the few who looks like he knows what's going on. The new guy Saliba looked competent too. But that White geezer, it's comical. Can you imagine him in an Arsenal team of old? Or that Peter Crouch wannabe for chavland. If you planted a turnip in the centre circle it would have more on-field awareness.

And yet, this standard of this league is so appalling, this bunch of shitkickers could actually win it. Don't see why not. Especially of they put a few quid on themselves and move the market.

[Niall_Quinn]

Well why not tell us so we can all make some money then?

I just fucking told you what to check out? You want me to place the bet for you too? And pay for it?

[Ollie the Optimist]

One thing that completely baffles me is that if a ball hits an attacker on the hand/arm, its handball and if htey score the goal is disallowed.

If the ball hits the same attacker but their teammate scores, it’s not handball & goal stands.

If the ball hits the defender then no handball either and they can clear it etc.

Same situation results in 3 completely different decisions. How?

Take the one on Saturday, it clearly hits cash on the arm (i dont think thats a penalty) but if the touch by Havetez is enough to deem it handball and disallow the goal then surely the touch by Cash on his arm is a penalty

[KSE Comedy Club]

One thing that completely baffles me is that if a ball hits an attacker on the hand/arm, its handball and if htey score the goal is disallowed.

If the ball hits the same attacker but their teammate scores, it’s not handball & goal stands.

If the ball hits the defender then no handball either and they can clear it etc.

Same situation results in 3 completely different decisions. How?

Take the one on Saturday, it clearly hits cash on the arm (i dont think thats a penalty) but if the touch by Havetez is enough to deem it handball and disallow the goal then surely the touch by Cash on his arm is a penalty

Good point, but it's hard to be certain.

First, you have to try and decipher the rules of the game - which change every game, every week, depending on who the ref is, who the VAR team is and who is playing.
Second, you have to take into account the corruption and bias that seems to happen blatantly, with the full backing of the FA, with officials who are completely unaccountable for anything & answerable to no one.
Third, I think it might also have something to do with "not being able to tell how much pressure was applied" to the handball........ maybe, who fucking knows these days!

[Letters]

I just fucking told you what to check out? You want me to place the bet for you too? And pay for it?

No, I want you to test your hypothesis that you can foretell results because it's all rigged.
I don't believe that, but if you were able to use the odds you mentioned to post results ahead of time accurately then I'd be convinced.

[Letters]

Whereas VAR mistakes are fully intended.
If that were true then they wouldn't release the audio and open themselves up to scrutiny.
VAR is clearly not working (inb4 you reply "it's working exactly as intended"). I've been an apologist for it because it feels like the right thing to do, but it's made the game worse.

The issue with your thesis is VAR doesn't actually have as much sway over results as you seem to think, nor do officials.
There are too many fine lines and other factors - Ødegaard should have scored at least 1, maybe 2 on Saturday. Had he done then we'd have got a result despite the VAR calls. The officials can't control stuff like that.

Spot bets are easier to control - wasn't there some thing some years back where there was some player in collusion around the timing of the first throw in, he agreed to hoof it out of play straight from kick off or something. Stuff like this can be controlled. The result of a game - there's just too many fine lines. Our win at Luton is a good example. How the fuck do you orchestrate that?

But hey, as I said if you start accurately posting results ahead of time based on your reading of betting odds then you'll convince me.

[Letters]

One thing that completely baffles me is that if a ball hits an attacker on the hand/arm, its handball and if htey score the goal is disallowed.

If the ball hits the same attacker but their teammate scores, it’s not handball & goal stands.

If the ball hits the defender then no handball either and they can clear it etc.

Same situation results in 3 completely different decisions. How?

Take the one on Saturday, it clearly hits cash on the arm (i dont think thats a penalty) but if the touch by Havetez is enough to deem it handball and disallow the goal then surely the touch by Cash on his arm is a penalty

The offside rule is utterly nonsensical these days. The main thing lacking is common sense.

[Niall_Quinn]

One thing that completely baffles me is that if a ball hits an attacker on the hand/arm, its handball and if htey score the goal is disallowed.

If the ball hits the same attacker but their teammate scores, it’s not handball & goal stands.

If the ball hits the defender then no handball either and they can clear it etc.

Same situation results in 3 completely different decisions. How?

Take the one on Saturday, it clearly hits cash on the arm (i dont think thats a penalty) but if the touch by Havetez is enough to deem it handball and disallow the goal then surely the touch by Cash on his arm is a penalty

The question is, why would they make the rules so vague at all? It gives them scope to be as incompetent as they like, but it allows introduces scope to cheat. The rule used to be hand to ball, and not ball to hand. Can't see what was wrong with that or why it needed to be changed. Well, not officially, at least. And now this orange card bullshit is on the way. More and more of these rule changes open up more scope for the officials to decide the result rather than the players. Are these officials simply egomaniacs? And even if they are, why are FIFA and UEFA pandering to them? When you consider FIFA and UEFA are tow of the most corrupt entities on the planet, and (being generous) you pile the egomaniac officials on top - it's not a good recipie. Nothing good can come of it and thoughts of nefarious intent aren't unrealistic at all.

How have so many donkeys ended up controlling literally everything?

[Niall_Quinn]

If that were true then they wouldn't release the audio and open themselves up to scrutiny.
VAR is clearly not working (inb4 you reply "it's working exactly as intended"). I've been an apologist for it because it feels like the right thing to do, but it's made the game worse.

The issue with your thesis is VAR doesn't actually have as much sway over results as you seem to think, nor do officials.
There are too many fine lines and other factors - Ødegaard should have scored at least 1, maybe 2 on Saturday. Had he done then we'd have got a result despite the VAR calls. The officials can't control stuff like that.

Spot bets are easier to control - wasn't there some thing some years back where there was some player in collusion around the timing of the first throw in, he agreed to hoof it out of play straight from kick off or something. Stuff like this can be controlled. The result of a game - there's just too many fine lines. Our win at Luton is a good example. How the fuck do you orchestrate that?

But hey, as I said if you start accurately posting results ahead of time based on your reading of betting odds then you'll convince me.

What are you on about? So what if they release the audio? All it tells you is they are either blind or corrupt. You can see for yourself a video of a defender shoving the attacking player in the box, more than enough of a foul in comparison to hundreds of others that have been given. And yet, in the official video or audio analysis the ruling is inconclusive - despite it being conclusive beyond doubt. Just because they say something doesn't make it so.

[Niall_Quinn]

What's with all the substitutions btw? WTF? They can basically replace the whole team now. This favours clubs that like to kick the player rather than the ball. Send five of them out to do some damage and sub them before the ref gets his cards out. We should go back to one sub and only for injuries. Instead, with the orange card on the way, it'll be more like a game of musical chairs.

[Mac76]

What's with all the substitutions btw? WTF? They can basically replace the whole team now. This favours clubs that like to kick the player rather than the ball. Send five of them out to do some damage and sub them before the ref gets his cards out. We should go back to one sub and only for injuries.

If only teams did that against Son I'd be happy

[Letters]

What are you on about? So what if they release the audio?
Well, if they're trying to influence results then releasing the evidence is a strange thing to do.


All it tells you is they are either blind or corrupt.
It's the former. Well, I'd go with incompetent rather than blind. The Liverpool debacle against Spurs - the VAR guys actually got it right. The trouble is they thought the ref had too and by the time they realised it was too late to go back. Utter incompetence and failure of communication all round.


You can see for yourself a video of a defender shoving the attacking player in the box, more than enough of a foul in comparison to hundreds of others that have been given. And yet, in the official video or audio analysis the ruling is inconclusive - despite it being conclusive beyond doubt. Just because they say something doesn't make it so.

Decisions in football are inherently about interpretation. You must have had plenty of conversations in pubs with people who you disagree with about football decisions. You're certain it was a clear foul/penalty/goal/sending off, they're equally certain it wasn't. That's football. That's a lot of sports. The trouble is VAR was sold as bringing certainty and "right" decisions. It hasn't. Partly due to the aforementioned incompetence, partly due to the inherent impossibility of doing that. All it's led to is more scrutiny over decisions, more stoppages in games and less common sense being applied. They should stick with the goalline technology and scrap the rest. They won't of course, but they should.

In brief: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

[Niall_Quinn]

Well, if they're trying to influence results then releasing the evidence is a strange thing to do.


It's the former. Well, I'd go with incompetent rather than blind. The Liverpool debacle against Spurs - the VAR guys actually got it right. The trouble is they thought the ref had too and by the time they realised it was too late to go back. Utter incompetence and failure of communication all round.



Decisions in football are inherently about interpretation. You must have had plenty of conversations in pubs with people who you disagree with about football decisions. You're certain it was a clear foul/penalty/goal/sending off, they're equally certain it wasn't. That's football. That's a lot of sports. The trouble is VAR was sold as bringing certainty and "right" decisions. It hasn't. Partly due to the aforementioned incompetence, partly due to the inherent impossibility of doing that. All it's led to is more scrutiny over decisions, more stoppages in games and less common sense being applied. They should stick with the goalline technology and scrap the rest. They won't of course, but they should.

In brief: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Yeah, it's always incompetence. In sport, in politics, in commerce. Just a series of mishaps by the same crowd of well-intentioned yet inept individuals. And they all get to keep their jobs, so they can be incompetent again, and again. It's all perfectly reasonable. The idea that the incompetence theory is a bulletproof shield that so many people somehow buy, each and every time, and is therefore the ideal mechanism for corruption is a cynical suggestion that doesn't fit with the lofty character self-assigned by people whose behaviour is often very different behind the scenes.

But you have a point. Because they don't sit in the booth whispering in conspiratorial tones is proof enough there can't be any corruption, even as we fondly recall the entirely above board World Cup in the entirely appropriate Qatar. Just because shady arabs and Russian gangsters are the bedfellows of our incompetent heroes at the FA and FIFA doesn't mean the wrong sort are running and ruining the game. Corrupt refs have been a thing in English football for years - holy hell, look at Bennett, and the twat who's actually in charge of all these incompetent victims today. Corrupt doesn't have to mean you took an envelope from some bloke in a sheet. Maybe sometimes it's just be pure bias. Regardless, I have an issue with such reliably incompetent individuals prospering instead of being held to account, if we take the perpetually naive angle on their behaviour.

[Letters]

Yeah, it's always incompetence. In sport, in politics, in commerce. Just a series of mishaps by the same crowd of well-intentioned yet inept individuals. And they all get to keep their jobs, so they can be incompetent again, and again. It's all perfectly reasonable.

I don't think it's reasonable at all, but it does seem to be the way of the world.

Come on, dude. You work, right? You have colleagues, probably people you're accountable to. Is the organisation you work for a hive of competence? Are your colleagues beacons of aptitude and good decision making? Are the people who rise to senior positions the most competent?
Because that's a hard no to all the above questions in my organisation.

I'm in a very bureaucratic organisation where senior people routinely make terrible decisions. And, weirdly, there's no consequence. If anything that incompetence seems to be actually rewarded, or they leave for an even more highly paid job elsewhere. Getting into senior positions seems to be based mostly on the ability to speak the right way and network with the right people, and a confidence in their ability which is baffling given their record. The people who sit on high have no idea what's happens on the ground and that leads them to make poor decisions.

From the people I know who have left this organisation, things aren't better elsewhere. They see incompetence everywhere they look too. So incompetence isn't really a theory. It's most people's experience of the world. You can hear it in the Liverpool disallowed goal at Spurs. You can hear it all unfold, the lack of communication, the frustration when they realised what an utter mess they've made of it. Now maybe they're just very good actors, but I'd suggest a more plausible explanation is that they made a mistake.

And no, that doesn't mean there is no corruption, why does everything have to be so absolute with you?
But I'd suggest it's much less prevalent than you imagine. It's clear that money was exchanged before the awarding of the World Cup to Qatar, I've no doubt that sort of stuff goes on all the time. But I don't buy that all the VAR chaps have earpieces linked to their paymasters in Asian betting cartels.

But as I said, if you think you can interpret betting odds to predict results to demonstrate collusion or corruption then let's see the results.


I have an issue with such reliably incompetent individuals prospering instead of being held to account, if we take the perpetually naive angle on their behaviour.
I have an issue with it too. The lack of accountability is maddening. I'm not sure what can actually be done about it though.

[WMUG]

Counter-intuitively, I think the way to improve refereeing competence is to massively increase penalties for dissent.

The reason referees are so shit at the moment is because so many would be refs are hounded out of the game at the grass roots level because they can't hack the abuse. I know that's why I stopped doing it, how many talented refs have we lost because of that?

If, at the top of the game, we started giving anybody but the captain for talking to the referee without being asked a yellow card, we'd see about 2 weeks of (very fun to watch) chaos, then dissent would be essentially eliminated.

They've started giving refs at grass-roots the ability to sinbin players for dissent which I'm fully behind, but the whole culture needs to change from top to bottom in order to get to a place where the refs are the top are the best at the job, not the best at dealing with abuse.

[Letters]

Counter-intuitively, I think the way to improve refereeing competence is to massively increase penalties for dissent.

The reason referees are so shit at the moment is because so many would be refs are hounded out of the game at the grass roots level because they can't hack the abuse. I know that's why I stopped doing it, how many talented refs have we lost because of that?

If, at the top of the game, we started giving anybody but the captain for talking to the referee without being asked a yellow card, we'd see about 2 weeks of (very fun to watch) chaos, then dissent would be essentially eliminated.

They've started giving refs at grass-roots the ability to sinbin players for dissent which I'm fully behind, but the whole culture needs to change from top to bottom in order to get to a place where the refs are the top are the best at the job, not the best at dealing with abuse.

:gp:

This is definitely a big problem in the game. One of my dad's mates back in the day reffed to quite a high level. Possibly did some games in the lower leagues. He gave it up in the end for the same reason. Even in some of the amateur games he was getting a level of abuse he just couldn't be doing with.

[Niall_Quinn]

I don't think it's reasonable at all, but it does seem to be the way of the world.

Come on, dude. You work, right? You have colleagues, probably people you're accountable to. Is the organisation you work for a hive of competence? Are your colleagues beacons of aptitude and good decision making? Are the people who rise to senior positions the most competent?
Because that's a hard no to all the above questions in my organisation.

I'm in a very bureaucratic organisation where senior people routinely make terrible decisions. And, weirdly, there's no consequence. If anything that incompetence seems to be actually rewarded, or they leave for an even more highly paid job elsewhere. Getting into senior positions seems to be based mostly on the ability to speak the right way and network with the right people, and a confidence in their ability which is baffling given their record. The people who sit on high have no idea what's happens on the ground and that leads them to make poor decisions.

From the people I know who have left this organisation, things aren't better elsewhere. They see incompetence everywhere they look too. So incompetence isn't really a theory. It's most people's experience of the world. You can hear it in the Liverpool disallowed goal at Spurs. You can hear it all unfold, the lack of communication, the frustration when they realised what an utter mess they've made of it. Now maybe they're just very good actors, but I'd suggest a more plausible explanation is that they made a mistake.

And no, that doesn't mean there is no corruption, why does everything have to be so absolute with you?
But I'd suggest it's much less prevalent than you imagine. It's clear that money was exchanged before the awarding of the World Cup to Qatar, I've no doubt that sort of stuff goes on all the time. But I don't buy that all the VAR chaps have earpieces linked to their paymasters in Asian betting cartels.

But as I said, if you think you can interpret betting odds to predict results to demonstrate collusion or corruption then let's see the results.


I have an issue with it too. The lack of accountability is maddening. I'm not sure what can actually be done about it though.

No, no, no, don't be silly. Yes I do work. But with "colleagues" - are you kidding me? What made you think I work with "colleagues"? That's a pretty severe insult, right? How the hell would you ever get things done if you worled with "colleagues" - by "colleagues" I assume you mean rivals?

I did that when I was young and figured things out pretty quickly. So I changed the landscape. I get the argument you are making and I don't dispute it on the surface. But you are also making another argument, when you look beneath the surface.

Take your own life. If you make a string of terrible decisions, what happens? Do you end up getting rewarded? Say you rack up your credit card, cheat on your wife, let your kids run riot, become an addict, what's the outcome? A better life?

So you have ACTUAL experience in the reality of life, yes? Put the effort in, get something back. Put no effort in, get fucked. Would that be fair?

Now tell me how and why the reality of life suddenly changes when you get a title attached to your name. What's different - in terms of reality?

You just defined corruption - didn't you? A different set of rules for one class. Regardless of their performance.

Now tell me, what's to stop that privileged class abusing their position? Do we just assume they are always virtuous? Let me ask you, if you COULD rack up your credit card, cheat on your wife, let your kids run riot, become an addict - and there were no consequences, what would stop you doing it? Your character, right? You'd know it was wrong. You'd have the self-respect and desire for personal dignity that defined the boundaries. Of course you have to be a moral person to exercise such restriant.

But if you aren't a moral person?

Coincidentally - not - it's easier for immoral people to get to the top because they are prepared to do things that moral people would never do.

Assuming you are a moral person, is it possible you can't even conceive just how fucking abhorrent and immoral people can be?

[Niall_Quinn]

Certain people, by no means all people. Most people are moral. If not fucked up in other ways.

[Niall_Quinn]

Counter-intuitively, I think the way to improve refereeing competence is to massively increase penalties for dissent.

The reason referees are so shit at the moment is because so many would be refs are hounded out of the game at the grass roots level because they can't hack the abuse. I know that's why I stopped doing it, how many talented refs have we lost because of that?

If, at the top of the game, we started giving anybody but the captain for talking to the referee without being asked a yellow card, we'd see about 2 weeks of (very fun to watch) chaos, then dissent would be essentially eliminated.

They've started giving refs at grass-roots the ability to sinbin players for dissent which I'm fully behind, but the whole culture needs to change from top to bottom in order to get to a place where the refs are the top are the best at the job, not the best at dealing with abuse.

If the players were actually professional there would be no dissent. But they aren't. They are a bunch of cunts - let's face it. With the few exceptions. Wasn't like that in the past. In fact Arsenal has a great history of sportsmanship, though they are not alone. Once it was the norm. The players are total cunts. You give a bunch of little shits a ton of money, or the prospect of making a ton of money if they trample over everything in their path. You think a ref is going to curb their cuntishness?

You could make the rule change but it wouldn't stop the modern player being a bone fide, fully paid up, piece of shit.

However, this could be one good rule change along with a thousand rescinded rules and the application of a few more obvious rules.

This should be a sport, not an industry. That's where you have to begin with your revolution.

[Niall_Quinn]

Oh, and the orange card is the shittiest idea of the lot. We've opened our throats to more American sewage than can be swallowed. Why do we need second helpings?