Sour Mash

Yeah, no legitimate reasons, apart from no logical process on how you'd stop the game and how long it would take to review a contentious decision from 15 different angles.

The whole thing sounds a farce. Which is why it will thankfully never happen.

But the players have stopped, they've put their appeal in. And what if the next time the ball goes out of play, it's because the opposition have scored.

I've actually explained how you haven't suggested a logical, workable process by which the game can be stopped. We haven't even touched upon how long it would take to review the decision and come to a correct decision.

So ultimately if the captain is at the other end of the pitch (be they keeper, centre back or striker), they've got to have an idea on what happened and contact the ref within 5 seconds. And if they're close enough to play, they can stop a break away at a key time.

What if the goalkeeper is Captain? How can he make a call to the ref in 5 seconds if it's a penalty shout down the other end? What's to stop them using the appeal in the 92nd minute of a game purely to stop a dangerous attacking break from the opposition?

Interesting, although all based on a very excitable agent it seems.

It seems fairly certain based on that article. Interesting signing, number 10 role? Maybe more of an option off the bench for the first season?

Spurs don't have a yellow away shirt every year, neither do Arsenal.

That's weird, why would there be similar arguments about a completely different process.

But what's your serious proposal?

But if there was a minimum "in play" time, then players would still know that as long as that's achieved they can still time waste. Better if refs actually booked players more often that are clearly time wasting.

At what point would you stop play to make a "video ref" decision? Players would still roll around on the floor and get a physio on when defending a lead even if the clock was stopped, it breaks up play, gives their defence a breather, encouraes the ref to book the opposition player. If you stopped the clock every time the game wasn'tlive you'd have 20mins added time for some games, never going to happen.

As explained so many times, video technology would not work for football, the flow of the game is different to other sports. Thankfully those running the game can see that and chose not to ruin it. If the clock was stopped every time the ball went out of play, games would take two hours. Another idea that thankfully won't happen.

I can only think of one or two out of the current PL that tend to have yellow and blue away kits?

This is actually a pretty decent deal I'd say, pity the club are doing such cheap coaches and aren't just subsidising match tickets.

Why not just have a yellow and blue away kit? Popular, bit of history to it, don't see why we don't just stick to that.

:lol: Imagine if that actually all happens though

How much of an impact does being in the last year of his contract make if there is more than one other club competing for his signature? It must impact it a bit, but I'm not sure how much.

And with Gallagher injured for a large chunck of the year, and Turbull and Stephens out getting first team experience.

Why is what he says s**t? He's talking about next season isn't he?

That'll definitely be an interesting part of pre-season/next season, where those two fit in and how we play them. Turnbull has been used at times as an attacking left back on top of a CB and Stephens has played a fair bit as a defensive midfielder with a decent range of passing. Big step up though.

I'm not entirely sure how transfers work, but could it be that as long as there is still a year on the contract and there is more than one party keenly interested in signing him, we're actually better off selling Clyne this summer than if he had a 4 year, £50k+ a week contract that we would have to pay up if he hadn't put in a transfer request?