Whitey Grandad

His value would have reduced over the length of his contract. Was the €7m the full upfront price or did it have conditions?

Very true.

Chelsea away?

He was given a run out right at the end (in injury time?). A nice touch from Pardew.

I'm comfortable with that.

But only for an infinitesimally short time. It spends infinitely more time wrong than it does right.

We can always hope.

Still injured.

I can smell the stench from a hundred miles away.

I fancy somewhere in Spain or Italy please.

Weird.

Who hasn't?

They have had the referees on their side lately. That often helps.

Me for.

The problem with the modern (latest) interpretation is that the official on the line can see if someone is in an offside position but cannot tell whether that person is interfering with an opponent by moving across or into their line of view, usually the referee has the best view of that. Either way I don't think that Kane could be considered offside under the current interpretations. He didn't actually stop moving though, he wandered towards the route that Son was taking and was probably enough of a distraction to disturb Forster's decsion-making. If you can be bothered to wade through the FIFA spiel then they talk about 'everybody wanting more goals' and so they opt for a more liberal interpretation. I'm all for more goals but not when they are against my side.

Or not turning up? Some would say that's what he did all the time he was with us. (Not me, certainly not me)

I'd buy twice as many.

One for you Alps

Over one game it might be down to luck but over 38 games it loses all significance.

Everybody is more skilful than Benali.

We might now be facing Liverpool in the final.

The sign of desperation of a worried man under pressure.

Indeed. But why did it take such a tragedy to get them removed?

I shall always remember him for that Arsenal goal. I can't wait for the next

I can see what you're saying here. At this level everything happens very quickly and I have no doubt that Kane's movement would have been enough to distract Forster for the fraction of a second that meant that he was just too late to claim the ball at Son's feet. His view of Son's run will have been obscured by Kane just enough to cause a misjudgement of whether he could intercept the ball but not enough to have been given as offside. Under the present interpretation the ruling was correct but back in my day Kane would have been flagged and rightly so. As Bill Nicholson said: 'If he's not interfering, what is he doing on the pitch?'