Medrurkin

Last para especially. When academies start to struggle to produce a stremm of talent, they often focus on 15-16 year olds that stand out, usually because they are more physically developed, not because of their skill or football brains. By the time they get to 18-19, the numpties are let go, and there are no real footballers left.

What is worse, he didn't look very interested in doing much, going through the motions and jogging back, getting into position in time for the next kick off.

OK, I'll go with your hair splitting on that one. My original point still holds though and the VAR replays show that the assistant is hardly ever exactly in line with either when the lines are drawn so a human decision is a calculated guess.

Basically, isn't that the same thing in these close decisions? And he still has to be level with the play to make the decision.

So can you define exactly how you would set the rules without leaving it open to the officials "guessing"? Surely it is the attacking players mis-judgement that is creating the decisions to be called against them? When pundits and commentators say "That would never have been given in the past" they just mean the officials would have guessed wrong. How many assistant referees are exactly in line with the player when the ball is played? If they are a few centimetres out, then they have a different perspective from the correct one. Unless there is evidence that VAR is inaccurate (and I haven't seen that argued much anywhere), then who is to say that officials making wrong decisions is better for the game and more interesting to watch? The only issue I have with VAR is the time it sometimes takes to get a decision. The penalty against Leeds today is a good example. Anyone could see that it was almost certainly a penalty based on the first couple of re-runs. But determining exactly when the contact took place, then was it on the line of the area? If the VAR officials had to make a call within 30 seconds would be a better way. Better information, but still allowing judgement.

Relative fan base size is hardly relevant in the PL where gate and merchandising income maybe adds around 10% of total income for most clubs. Look at the massive disparity in ST prices across PL clubs. Owners don't deliberately keep prices down for the benefit of the fans, it is to maximise gate revenue over the season by getting more punters in. Unless clubs have serial big time successes on the pitch (like the so called top 6), there are simply not enough fans who want to pay the high price for access. Clubs like Derby, Leeds, Nottingham Forest are only attractive if they can be bought very cheaply, have a decent stadium and there is a good prospect of getting into the PL and staying there with half decent football. Sunderland are doing the League One experience for the second time in recent history, despite having high gate turnouts and ST sales. Ellis Short, a US billionaire took a bath on his investment there, as after a few years of clinging onto PL survival, they slipped and plunged. Most of these investors do not care about football, they care about making money, so very soon stop putting money into the club. They all think they will use the "develop young talent and sell it high" approach, which even Southampton have found difficult to produce in recent years. Short made most of his money by trading distressed debt, a very ugly industry. I believe the prospective Southampton buyer has been in that arena too, though it has largely been billed as "Capital Investment Consulting".

How do you get we are not looking like scoring? We have had 3 fractionally offside goals disallowed, all of them would class a classy, well worked goals but for a fraction of a second.

To be honest, at the end, I was content for the passing it around at the back, because W Ham looked far more likely to score than we did. Given our propensity for the Stephens/Bednarek partnership to get caught cold with counters, I was holding my breath and glad for the final whistle.

To be honest, this time last year we would have had problems selling anyone except Ings. The price we got for Hojberg shows that our squad does not attract a lot of attention recently. The past 6 months have given a brighter polish, and RH himself expressed surprise at where we are currently. We can only assert that we are not a selling club when there are buyers knocking at the door, and we don't sell, which isn't likely to be anytime soon, with the greatest respect to the current squad.

Without Vardy, they are bang average, same as we are without Ings.

No need to sign him in January. He wants to be here, and if we want him, it will be down to the money. Besides, he might crock himself between now and then.

Still having more of an impact than Redmond or Djeneppo, and about equal to Armstrong. I was not a believer, but he is swaying me.

I am sure that RH will expect the players to play as they have been coached.

Both Diallo and Salisu have been with the club for several months. If they are not ready to play in the first eleven, the club has dropped another blooper or two. As expressed above, behind closed doors against a struggling, inconsistent team, it isn't going to get better than that. Playing them against a team way, way off our standard (currently top half of the PL) is not a valid try out.