Whitey Grandad

Fair comment.

And why is that relevant? We're not talking about a normal job market.

I agree with you. As someone once said, our politicians are the best that money can buy.

Aren't we all ? Good luck with your recovery. Every day is one more little victory.

When I was watching it live I never at any time thought 'that's the keeper's ball'. Forster has to cover the whole of the goal area and I think you have underestimated the time it would have taken him to get to Costa and puch the ball clear. Of course, we don't know how the defence has been coached, it may be that Forster has been told to leave this type of cross to the central defenders. I think you're being very harsh on him. Edit: I've just watched the goal again and I can see what you are saying. I still don't think that Forster would have got there in time but what is most obvious is that Costa gets a completely free run from outside the area almost to the 6-yard line.

I think your view of it has been foreshortened by the TV angle. It was not his job to cover Costa and if he'd come out to him then the ball may have gone to someone else. It was a freee header from an unchallenged cross. The whole defence was at fault.

So what is the point of references like these? At the time they were written they were a fair description but I think most people (including me) were prepared to gve him a few games to see how he settled in.

He would not have reached the cross and Costa would have headed into an empty net.

I'm surprised that Forster gets mentioned for not coming to claim the cross to Costa yet nobody has criticised Davis for not tracking his man.

Definite penalty, played the man before the ball. Sky analysed this challenge as well as Fonte's on Costa. On comparison they showed that Fonte played the ball first b&b to the Chelsea player caught Mané first. They also pointed out that Mané went down as part of the challenge but Costa went down just after, once he realised that he'd lost the ball.

No need, there are plenty of applicants.

Speaking of which, does anybody know when the TV games for May are chosen? I'm particularly concerned about the Villa game staying where it is.

I can't complain about today's ref. Anyone who doesn't give a penalty to Chelsea gets a 10 from me

I agree with you here. If we was p!ssed then it was very poor behaviour on the part of anybody wo was responsible for his hospitality.

Maybe he just didn't think Lovren's handball was deliberate, and I would agree with him. The second Djuricic one I don't think he saw it clearly enough to give us a penalty, unfortunately.

He'd go down well at Chelsea.

I can only find this one: http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/statements/jeremy-clarkson-top-gear Where they describe a 'fracas'. If there is to be a disciplinary hearing then the BBC would have acted inappropriately in releasing any allegations without the agreement if all parties.

Because so far it is all a bit anecdotal.

It's an illness.

He is known to be a recovering alcoholic and as such deserves all the support we can give him.

It's all a bit 'he said, she said' at the moment but as others have said, if there is to be a disciplinary hearing then all sides are supposed to keep their comments under wraps.

This is true. At first sight I would say that with a small volume of liquid you should lay the barrel on its side so that the liquid was as shallow as possible. I don't think it will make any difference since most of the whiskey will disappear through evaporation through the wood anyway (the Angels' share). A friend of mine once made a barrel full of home-distilled whiskey but when they eventually came to open it only 10% was left. However, it did taste delicious.

In most cases that I have seen the TV replays have not proved the referee to have been incorrect, I have often maintained that seeing something through a remote lens in slow-motion does not give you a true interpretation of the incident. Some of these players have spent many hours practising their simulation and it needs a good close-up view in 3-D real time to detect this. You are right that it easier not to make a decision and be thought wrong than to give one that may have a more influential outcome. There was an article in The Times recently describing this. I think they called it the sin of omission rather than commission.

I'm just making a comparison, I didn't offer an opinion. There are differences in that Prescott was caught egg-handed on video whereas this incident is still in the world of the unsubstantiated.

John Prescott slugs a member of the public and remains Deputy Prime Minister. Just saying, like....