Dark Munster

... and if we had beaten Burnley, Newcastle, West Ham and Bournemouth we'd already be celebrating another season in the PL and in the hunt for Europe.

I can see in the not too distant future that a computer would be used to analyse the video and give an offside verdict with 99.9% accuracy, all within 10 seconds. The only downside is when it's implemented poor old Whitey Grandad's head would explode!

Me too. I think it was because Kane had gone off.

With Bednarek and Stephens in good form, and with 2 or 3 back ups available, surely a LB back up is the priority, along with a goal scorer if Ings gets injured (newsflash to the club: we're ****ed if he does). Last season there were 3 crap teams at the bottom. This season there doesn't seem to be even one. No time for complacency this time. Which means of course the club will be.

Normally yes, but this season doesn't look normal. Even the bottom club looks semi-decent. On top of that the top teams are dropping more points than usual. Leicester are doing really well of course, and Liverpool are unstoppable. But below those two the usual big 6 are hemorrhaging lots of points. Look at Arsenal's point tally for example, and our wins against Chelsea (and Spurs today). Even the mighty Man City aren't their usual selves, and with the title all but over I can see them taking their foot off the gas in the second half, coasting to a top 4 finish with minimal effort and focusing on the CL. Either way, it looks like a real dogfight at the bottom. Hopefully we're not involved and can sit back and have a good laugh at the ones involved.

As I said, I don't know whether to look up or down.

Could well be. And after that 9-0 maybe Ralph went back to listening to his number 2 again.

Has there been a mass brawl in the WHam - Bompey match yet? With 8 players red carded, match abandoned, and 3 points deducted from both teams?

I think the 9-0 was a blessing in disguise. He may have been too over confident in himself before that, making loony decisions like the constant LB and RB messing around and the Bournemouth line up. It brought him down to earth, but at the same time he discovered the board were still 100% behind him. That last part also sent a message to the players that they weren't going to be able to down tools and force him out.

I'm not convinced 40 points will assure safety this season. Apart from Norwich there don't appear to be any dogs, and even Norwich aren't that bad and have a very good striker. Villa looked awful against us, but are coming to life. And we all know about Watford's revival under nasty Nige and have Deeney now fit. It would be highly amusing if the Hammers went down with 40+ points. I think they were the last team to do so.

I don't know whether to look up or down.

I don't think there's anything wrong with drawing a line and zooming in, but I agree with the gist of what you're saying. Give the VAR 30 seconds max to come to decision, and the attacking team gets the benefit of the doubt.

Exactly this, no margin of error nonsense. It's either decided as offside or not. As others have said, change the rule to use players' feet only as the measure, to keep it simple. 30 seconds looking at the freeze frame of when the ball leaves the passing player's foot, and decide if the attacker's foot is level or behind the defender's. If in doubt, the goal stands. For defending teams who whine that they think the attacking player was 5 mm offside, tough luck. You shouldn't have held such a tight line. If it's that close you can expect both good and bad calls. Be happy that you will no longer be on the wrong end of 1 metre errors. The same applies to attacking teams who lose out on tight calls.

Does it say anything about where Saints will finish this season?

We were lucky they were incompetent.

Video Assistant Referees are highly-trained and experienced officials that you’re talking about.

Yes, and why is that a problem? We've had bad calls since the law was first introduced. Football is not an exact science. The idea is to eliminate the most egregious mistakes. VAR mistakes will be marginal at worst. Sometimes the defending team will be lucky by a few mm, sometimes the attacking team will be. That's life, who cares? Just like a lucky bounce or deflection, take it on the chin and move on. This is not chess we are talking about. We want to avoid the ridiculous offside mistakes like the one in the Cup final My suggestion is 30 seconds for all decisions (not just offside).

Who cares? An inch is better than a mile. VAR should make a decision within 30 seconds. If he isn't sure by then the attacker isn't offside and the goal stands. He may make a few mistakes by fractions of an inch, but that's massively better than going back to the old way of a middle age man several feet behind play making an instant decision without a chance to review. The idea of VAR is to eliminate clear and obvious errors, not to judge offside by nanometers. It will still be subjective, but to a much higher degree of accuracy.

Luke also said Jesus condoned beating slaves. I wouldn't trust Luke.

References are cited. e.g. Robert M. Price (a Christian atheist) who denies the existence of Jesus agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 0830838686 p. 61

I don't have to go out in the middle of the pitch to know that VAR wouldn't miss Watford's handball goal (as just one of hundreds of examples). Sorry Grandad, the PL, UEFA and the rest of the world doesn't agree with you. No offense.

Exactly this. Have offside decided by feet position only, and give the Video Assistant Ref (it's not a machine!) 30 seconds to make a judgement. Occasionally he'll make a mistake (by millimetres), but so what? Better then a plethora of on-field ref's centimetre or metre mistakes in the past. I don't understand why people whine about minuscule mistakes and think we should go back to the old huge ones. VAR has a better view than the on field ref. No-one (apart from Whitey Grandad) can argue about that. The only legitimate complaint is if it takes too long (like the farce in the Women's WC). Thankfully the PL hasn't made that mistake. As I said, give VAR 30 seconds max to rule on offside or overturn any other decision, otherwise it stands. Simples.

Yes, he'll get at least one. You can bet your house on it. Glasgow, take note.

Whether you believe or not the biblical stories about him, there's little doubt among scholars that he existed as a person. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#Historical_existence

In a word, yes. Much better than going down because a Watford player punches an equaliser into the net with his hand. VAR may not be perfect, but it's much less likely to make a mistake, and if it does it'll be by millimeters, not centimeters or meters by incompetent on field refs. Someone suggested having offside decided by feet only. Good idea. On top of that, then let VAR have 30 seconds max to decide if his feet are offside. If VAR can't decide by then the goal stands. Problem solved.