hypochondriac

No the football World just doesn't want pedantic a*seholes to be in charge of the game ruining it for normal fans who don't want goal validity to be decided by a hair width. It will be adressed as soon as practically possible because most fans realise it isn't good for the game. If you think it doesn't need changing and won't be changed then that's fine. You're not right but you're entitled to that opinion.

But I would get a similar response from flat earthers and 9/11 truthers. I don't have to watch hours of conspiracy videos on YouTube to know that there are not specific prophecies in the bible that unequivocally prove that events in the 20th and 21st centuries were predicted by passages in the bible. If those specific prophecies existed then we would all know about it and you would be earnestly posting them. It's the same response David icke gives to criticism by the way- unless you're willing to read all his books and attend his 9 hour lectures you can't offer valid criticism to his ramblings.

Well then I'm sorry I should have said you sound insane. I have no idea about your actual level of sanity though I would imagine you would have quite a bit in common with conspiracy theorists as that's what you remind me of. Lets be honest, you don't have any proof that so called prophecies are referring to the specific events of the 20th century, in the same way that followers of nostradamus have no idea that his similarly vague predictions have come true. They take events from the last couple of centuries and then use them to fit a narrative.

Superb argument. You asked me to elaborate, I did so and then you just respond like that. I reckon I'd be much more open to persuasion than hardcore atheists like MLG but not when you're so dismissive of someone who challenges you.

Because "marrying up to world events" just sounds like a David icke conspiracy theory. There are no specifics from prophecies in the bible, you can twist things around to fit things to make it look like it's some sort of prophecy rather like flat earthers, 9/11 truthers or fake moon landing nuts, but to a neutral observer you just sound a bit weird. How can you be sure that this so called prophecy was talking about the 20th and 21st century? What if you got it wrong and they are actually talking about events 300 years from now? What gives you the certainty that this stuff written down in a form of Chinese whispers is actually some miraculous divine prophecy from, hundreds of years ago?

Fancy a bet? This time next year things will have changed. Happy for a small wager with the loser to, donate to charity.

It's going to change even if its at the end of the season and we have to continue with the broken system until then. People like you will be upset but the vast majority will be very happy.

I'm not an atheist and I think you're insane.

You're wrong, footballing authorities, pundits and a majority of fans think you are wrong and guidance will soon, be changing so your view will be irrelevant.

Yep that seems like common sense. Much better than the current system anyway.

Like I said, the football authorities obviously disagree with you which is why they are making the necessary changes.

Why did you get into a long forum conversation with MLG and not think it would end in tedium? More fool you.

MLG's militant atheism makes me more religious and then raging bull's insane religious answers make me more atheist. I'm in some quantum state between the two.

Or they think you're talking b*llocks???

Hmm I'm not sure about that. I know quite a few Christians and they wouldn't agree withuch of what you've written.

Yes but I note that any predictions you've picked out have been just vague enough to allow you to fit it into your narrative for the 20th century. It would be pretty impressive if it dealt with some specifics but it doesn't, a bit like how fortune tellers and psychics sicker some people in.

Agreed. A bit of divine intervention for sure.

Matthew Le God might be the most annoying poster in the history of the forum with his dog with a bone like posting style and weird automaton personality, but you really don't help matters raging bull when you post things like the above, you just sound a bit unhinged. I don't think even most Christians would try to say that random passages from the bible are literally predicting events from the last century or two.

I think the people who make the laws of the game know a bit better than we do about why var was brought in. Var "should not be too forensic" and "should only be used to reverse clear and obvious errors." That's literally the guidance that the law-makers of the game are issuing and once that's brought in the likes of klopp will have to like it or lump it. Var will then be used to stop travesties of justice like the Watford handball or the cup final against us but won't be analysed to the minute degree that it currently is which will suit me and seemingly many other fans just fine. My opinion would not be changed by an "offside" decision given as a goal because the difference on a video monitor is so minute that it's virtually imperceptible and the importance of a game would not change that fact. The Spurs fans I was with were saying they would have preferred that var were not used in that way even if it had meant them conceding. They know the downsides of it because they were on the other side of a similar position the previous week with Harry kane. Let's hope they push it through ASAP.

A reading from the book of hypochondriac: "and on the 7th day, Matthew Le God realised he was wasting his life attempting to convert the believers to his particular brand of militant atheism and went back to beta testing football manager 2021." Thanks be to God.

"And God said in the year of our Lord 2019, let there be a Web forum called saintsweb and let that forum be visited by a dry, pedantic, borderline autistic irritant with social problems and let him be known as Matthew Le God. And lo it was so."

Had there been a reasonable margin of error involved and the first Norwich goal had been allowed, it would have been utterly uncontroversial. Had that Norwich goal stood, I don't think there would have been anyone that wouldn't have thought it was fair enough. I mean ffs I was watching the game with 4 spurs fans and they all thought it was mental and judging by the multiple texts on BBC sport also from spurs fans they clearly felt similar. Its quite simple really, var was introduced for clear and obvious errors. If it takes multiple camera angles and replays and it's still not 100% clear then it's not clear and obvious and the goal should stand. Sounds like they have listened to those complaints from fans who understand how the implementation is ruining the game and will make changes along those lines so happy days. It will displease the autists but it has to be done so we aren't continually disallowing goals by the width of a hair.

In reality there isn't going to be much controversy about goals that to the naked eye look onside. The Norwich goal in particular at the weekend is an example of a goal that would have been utterly uncontroversial had it been given. No one would have batted an eyelid.

Because its pathetic to have an opinion on this simply because your team has benefitted from the current rules over half a season.

I just don't understand why anyone would be in favour of the current implementation of var based on a very small number of games where we have happened to benefit.