Sour Mash

But it can't be cost can it? If we were to sell an additional 7k tickets at an average of £45 that would be £315,000, easily enough to cover any potential costs and then some. Plus the additional prestige it would bring to the competition having a bigger crowd. Think it's more to do with the usual problem with footballing authorities - p**s poor levels of organisation.

Yes, we would have contested over three different penalty decisions and would probably have had a very good sending off shout when their centre back held back Barnard in the 2nd half when he was trying to run through on goal. There are plenty of decisions that are shown over and over after a game or say on match of the day, where none of the pundits can agree what the decision should be and can take ages trying to slow it down and look at it at different angles to get a decision. And you still don't see the problems that would be caused by stopping a game of football mid-flow 6 times throughout a match? Or that teams will very carefully choose when they think there has been a "sending off" or "penalty" decision against them when they're 1-0 up with 5 minutes to go and they want to slow the game down and have a breather and still have a couple of appeals left to use!

Grown men should not be seen carrying flags unless it's for their kids. Only exceptions to this are the proper, big St George's crosses or old school Union Jacks, bound to be plenty of them coming out for Wembley.

So you'd have the ref stopping play, restarting with a bounce ball? A game like Saturday there were easily 10 decisions that could have been reviewed. Do you not see how that would kill the game? Yes of course there are decisions that won't take long, but there are plenty of decisions that would require several replays from different angles and are still inconclusive. And as we all know how much stick refs get for incorrect decisions he will want to refer as much as possible to the video checks, to ensure he is not criticised afterwaards for not doing so, he will always cover his back and err on the side of caution in such situations.

FFS, I do think the ticket office have made a fair few gaffs with these JPT tickets. They really need a proper, easy to use, glitch free internet booking system.

It's not even about winning or not winning. Yes it helps going into games having a good chance of getting a win and despite your stats above, we haven't lost too many on the road this season at all. It's more to do with paying what I consider a "fair" price to watch a game of football, surrounded by people who have travelled miles to get behind saints and not because they'd "always wanted to visit Old Trafford", it's being able to enter the ground at 2.55pm and choose where I want to stand with a group of mates rather than being pointed to our specific seats, going to grounds with character. The novelty might wear off and of course I want Saints to do well, that goes without saying. But I doubt I'll enjoy watching us in the Prem as much as I have this season. I've done every away game bar one this season, I definitely won't be doing that back in the PL. But if you don't do aways regularly the above is all quite meaningless I guess.

If you read what I posted, I agreed that there would be plenty of cases where it takes "only" 30 seconds to make a decision. But there will be plenty of decisions that do take longer, Saturday's game at Tranmere is actually an excellent reason why video technology shouldn't be brought in, despite the ref making many incorrect and extremely frustrating decisions. There were numerous moment sof dispute during the game (when it was in full flow), that if referred to a video official in the stand would have taken numerous views to reach a decision and even then would not have proven conclusive. It would have massively disrupted the game. And despite the Saints players having a fair old moan at times, at no point did they significantly hold up play by doing so. You say teams would only have 3 appeals per match - Saints would have wanted at least double that on Saturday. And teams will obviously use that tactically to slow down and stop play when suits them and they're under pressure. It won't ever be introduced as it won't work.

Slightly on that note, are the block/road systems quite easy to follow? For example if you were on 42nd street, you'd be able to logically follow how to get to 33rd street? Or doesn't it work like that!

Cricket, rugby and tennis are MUCH slower sports than football, with many more natural stops in play. You were unable to answer my question above regarding obvious problems with when play would be stopped for a decision to be made. I agree there will be decisions that only take a minute, but equally there will be plenty of decisions that take a lot longer, as shown by Saturday's game, that despite numerous replays from different angles, it is still not possible to make a clear decision. It won't ever work and it won't ever happen.

Couldn't have put it any better myself, sums it all up for me.

So your team might get a last minute winner in a cup tie, you should all be going ballistic, but instead have to stand there scratching your @rse for a few minutes to see if a penalty should have been given 5 minutes previously down at the other end! And you think that won't kill the game! And there are LOADS of cases where even after numerous video replays no-one can decide if its a foul or not, so you might have a few mintues where they have to replay the footage over and over to see if there was a touch by the defender or not and its still not conclusive. Yes the 4 or 5 minute thing is an exageration, I'm sure a lot of the cases could be decided in less than that, but there will be plenty of cases that take longer, we see it on sky etc at half time when they reshow an incident over and over again, get clips from different angles etc to make the correct the decision and still no-one is sure. I was at the game at Tranmere on Saturday and think at a fair estimate you would have had to have broken play at least 10 times to check video footage of key decisions, none of which have been particularly clear even when viewed numerous times on video. And who decides when a decision is referred to a video referee? The only one that I will give you, although I'm certainly not a fan of the idea, is the sensor on the goal line to say if the ball has crossed, on the basis that it is immediate and undisputable and in no way detracts from the flow or excitement of the game.

Which university out of interest?

On a sperate point, how many games a year are decided on whether or not a ball has crossed the line? Very, very few in my opinion, probably less than 1%.

Know what you mean. Goes without saying that I want Saints to do well, but I've really enjoyed this season. I'd do less games if we were in the Premier League, Sod paying £45 to see us getting hammered by Chelsea surrounded by JCLs, can't think of anything worse.

Posted this on another thread on the main forum and can't be bothered to rewrite it! There is an obvious scenario that no-one has been able to give me a clear answer to. At what point is the game stopped for a decison to be made? Next time the ball goes out of play? What if after a penalty shout, the defending team goes up the other end and scores and that is the next time the ball goes out of play? Imagine the goal might not count, every stands around for 4 or 5 mins while the penalty shout gets replayed enough times and from different angles for the decision being made? It would kill the game. Or if you stopped play straight away and had a bounce ball once the decision had been made, again it would become a slow moving, scrappy farce. And who would decide which incidents were relayed to a video judgement? Football thrives on it's pace, the way it can flow from one end to the other and back again. Video technology will not stop the controversy, but just slow down and kill a large part of what makes watching football entertaining. Just because something might work in another sport doesn't mean it would work in football, you are in no way comparing like with like.

"All you need is a laser built into the goal posts to give a near instant decision" is that ALL? "Just" a "laser built into the goal posts"! And what if the "laser" or whatever it is doesn't work or has faults, look at even the best most expensive technology in the world, they all have glitchs, errors and periods where they need fixing at the most imprtant times! The horse racing example is completely different to the flow of a game of football.

Most N18s should go to Harrow anyway, but yeah Cecil Avenue is just after Wembley, so you'd be fine anyway. It is a hassle, but it's a free journey!

Is it worth doing something like a day at the Yankees? I'm not exactly a baseball fan (don't even understand it), but always thought it looked a good, authentic New York experience. From the write ups I've read it sounds like it is actually a very safe city, but what is the worst area? The Bronx? Want to have a nose around there just to see what it's like. Also, does anyone know of any good tours that would cover the history of New York, particularly the earliest stuff?

The N18 goes from the West End (starts at Trafalgar Square and goes through Oxford Circus) and goes to Wembley. Takes a while and goes through a few moody areas, but I've never had a problem on a night bus, as most "normal" people use them due to the cost of taxis.

Fairly open minded really. Just thinking that we've got 8 nights in New York, so if there was anywhere within an easy/cheapish journey from there that was worth staying in and would maybe provide an interesting contrast to New York. Going with a few other lads, but we'll be doing plenty of nights out etc while in the city, so not too bothered if we happen to end up somewhere a bit quieter. Thought about Rhode Island. Or the Hamptons, but I think they're a bit too posh for us!

The tubes stop running bit gone 00.30 on a Saturday night and 20/30 mins earlier on a sunday night, but obviously you don't want to cut it too fine. If you were to hail a black cab in the early hours of the morning to take you from central london to Wembley I reckon you'd be looking at not far off £40/50. If you were to pre-book a mini cab or were able to haggle with one of the illegal mini cabs, you could probably halve that amount. Night bus back from central london to wembley run all night and are free if you have a travel card from the previous day, would take a bit under an hour and are obviously not everyone's cup of tea.

Cheers lads, some good info there. Couple of other questions? What are the best areas for a night out? What are the irish bars like? Good for watching sport etc? Is doing a day at something like the Yankees a worthwhile, authentic NY experience? Anyone know of any places that are a bit different and interesting and would be worth staying at for a couple of nights that would be in easy reach of New York, say a couple of hours by coach or train? We're over there for a over a week, so thinking about trying to see somewhere else that would be a complete contrast to New York.

Rugby is a completely different sport to football, there is very little point comparing the two. There is an obvious scenario that no-one has been able to give me a clear answer to. At what point is the game stopped for a decison to be made? Next time the ball goes out of play? What if after a penalty shout, the defending team goes up the other end and scores and that is the next time the ball goes out of play? Imagine the goal might not count, every stands around for 4 or 5 mins while the penalty shout gets replayed enough times and from different angles for the decision being made? It would kill the game. Or if you stopped play straight away and had a bounce ball once the decision had been made, again it would become a slow moving, scrappy farce. And who would decide which incidents were relayed to a video judgement? Football thrives on it's pace, the way it can flow from one end to the other and back again. Video technology will not stop the controversy, but just slow down and kill a large part of what makes watching football entertaining.

Going in the summer for a week and a bit. Anyone got any tips of places to go and see, things to do etc? I know all the obvious one's, but are they worth doing and are there any other places or things to do that aren't so well known? Also any tips on best areas for nightlife, pubs/bars/clubs etc? Is it easy to walk around, or do you have to rely on the cabs and metro? Cheers in advance! :cool:

No. If you can't be @rsed doing that yourself you shouldn't even be going.