Dark Munster

.... between Palace, Burnley and Newcastle.

That's what the Phew believe, but even if the skates had beaten We're Bottom Again 10-0 we still would've gone down. We (i.e. Saggy) relegated ourselves by losing to Utd.

Yes but they've got tons of chips, and the other players are skint.

If the title of this thread is a question, the answer is no.

We get about £100 million each year from being in the PL. If we were run properly and had decent scouts it wouldn't be too rich for us to remain a mid-table team. Of course if the big six succeed in destroying the PL we'll have a massive drop in revenue but still stuck with a huge debts and wage bill. i.e. fucked.

Apart from the (lucky) goal Leicester also had zero shots on target. Both teams were crap.

Not a chance, although if we lose tomorrow it's moot. And please don't call me Shirley.

I'd rather be where we are in the Cup.

They'll never throw bricks alone.

Wins against Leicester and Chelsea in the Cup, plus against Fulham in the league (just as an insurance), and we can get stuffed 9-0 in all the rest for all I care.

I don't think that's arguable.

If it goes to penalties we'll be unbeatable.

Everyone on the bench.

Yes, that'll work too. The main thing is to use just one frame of reference, like they do in ice hockey (skates), horse racing (noses) etc.

I wasn't aware of this so did a Google: https://theathletic.com/news/automated-offsides-world-cup-arsene-wenger/Lp1QUh86ZSqS Sounds promising. I would still change the rule for offside decided by feet only, and put trackers in the boots. (One of the comments at the bottom, not me, also suggested using feet only).

I beg to differ, if it's that close and the goal is given against us I wouldn't complain. There will always be a question when the ball left the foot of the passer anyway, so no one can be certain if it's really close. Was the attacker 5 mm offside? Who cares? And it'll even out for all teams over the long run. As long as Gabbi disallowed goals are the thing of the past I don't have a problem.

Better than binning VAR completely. Plus 15 seconds is just one suggestion, maybe 30 would do. The point is give them a fixed time limit. If they can't decide by then, then it has to be close.

It'll make a big difference, only one clear cut thing to look at. For example the Wolves player would clearly be onside. Agreed about giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacker. And give VAR about 15 seconds to decide whose boot is ahead, if he can't by then, then the goal stands.

'Arsehole'?

Maybe because it means he has to come back to us?

Past time to change the rule and use boots only to determine offsides. How long before those morons realise this?

Wolves denied by this "offside". Time to change the rule to use boots only.

You beat me to it. FA Cup + 17th (or higher) = 10/10 Ok, FA Cup and staying up on goal difference I may reduce it to 9.5/10