Whitey Grandad

That's exactly my point. Slow-motion does not give you the natural cadence of the incident. On television you can't see which direction the player is looking. It's like a picture where the eyes follow you round the room. There's a whole a lot of detail that you can't get on the replay.

Doctors call it cyberchondria.

They need to wait for any swelling to go down. Does anyone know of a nurse who could help?

I'll say it again - TV does not give a very good representation of what actually took place. There are a lot more clues that the referee uses, the speed at which the player goes down, where his eyes are looking, how his momentum affects his behaviour, does his action seem natural? There is far more going on in real life than TV can ever portray.

It seems like he doesn't want to touch the ball. He even wears gloves FFS.

They have a very stringent fitness level to maintain and they are tested regularly with a beep test.

Is this the real life, is this just fantasy?

It's only a game.

The TV cameras are not in the correct position. Who draws that line across the pitch? 'Ignoring the arms, any part of the player nearer the goal line than the second-last defender'? You'd need a camera view from pitch level in-line with the second-last defender. Many's the time that I've seen a TV replay where the commentator says one thing when it's the opposite.

That's a lot for one game! Didn't he used to wear Man Utd socks?

I know some referees who think that way. The player had to make some attempt to get over the tackle, it's not enough just to see a leg and then pretend to fall over it. As Stan Collymore said, the player has to be prevented from doing what they intended to do. The worst case I ever had of players trying the 'sneaky stuff' involved ex-professionals, which was rather disappointing. It's supposed to be a sport, not a con-trick.

But could you at least determine the direction it came from?

Far too complicated for that. For the goal decision there are several cameras and the goal frame is in a fixed location. For offside you've got several players moving about. Then you've got to decide 'gaining an advantage' and all that stuff.

Don't they still owe Liverpool for Crouch?

That'll help

That won't be easy. I understand that the power is not that great and so the range is quite limited. HMS Tireless has the necessary equipment which presumably is why she's there.

But is it a pure ping or is it modulated in any way so as to give more information?

Yes, I agree.

I've also witnessed a lot of drivel poured over some video replays and slow-motion will never give a true impression of what actually occurred.

It's ultrasonic so it has to be converted to audio frequencies if they're using headphones. The submarines have the most sophisticated equipment but it would need programming to search for the FDR signature. I don't know how complex this us, whether it's just a short burst or more complicated than that.

Perhaps he pretends to support every club in the country and posts on all 92 forums. Has anybody checked?

Start your own?

For offside the official is in the best possible position, far better than any television camera and especially for marginal ones. It's not difficult to get the decision correct, which is what makes yesterday's fiasco all the more remarkable.

What about when a red card is not given when it should have been?

Is this the worst season ever?