General Premier League Thread 2023-24 Mod Note in op 27/6/23 And 21/05/24

IncognitoMan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122143746#Comment_122143746

Where do those media outlets get their figures from?
That's the issue. The source of the info is unreliable.

Those media outlets are reporting what is given / available to them but we know that info is not reliable

citytillidie

Final Day fixtures
All 16:00 Kick-offs
Arsenal V Everton - Live on TNT Sports 1
Brentford V Newcastle
Brighton V Man Utd
Burnley V Forest
Chelsea V Bournemouth - Live on Sky Sports Arena
Palace V VIlla
Liverpool V Wolves - Live on Sky Sports Premier League
Luton V Fulham
Man City V West Ham - Live on Sky Sports Main Event
Sheff Utd V Spurs

artanevilla

The title is the only thing really in play on Sunday?

Talisman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122143644#Comment_122143644

Wouldn't UEFA take serious issue with Chelsea's financials if they qualify for Europe this season? An extended transfer ban could scupper the project on the pitch.

eagle eye

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144362#Comment_122144362

It's all we have to go on. And I doubt they can do anything about transfer fees. Any suggestion that they are is just wild speculation.

Wages is a totally different thing as it's pretty easy to get a player to invest in a company that suddenly gets a large injection of cash and the share price grows massively overnight. That's just an example of things that can be done and it's hard to do anything about that.

Anyway despite question marks over their dealings it's clear that Arsenal, United, Newcastle and Chelsea are spending enough to take them on. Problem is that at three of those clubs they aren't managing things right. I'd suggest that if Pep and his team were managing United, Chelsea or Arsenal that they'd be looking at four in a row.

jacool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122143781#Comment_122143781

I think you may find that, if you are very, very, very patient, at some time in the future, some well paid lawyers may defend them. I hope they will be stupid, but I fear they won't.

ArmaniJeanss

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144166#Comment_122144166

Are you fine with the Thierry Henry handball still leading to a French goal v Ireland? Because that is what you are suggesting. I genuinely can't see the sport ever going back to that situation.

IrishOwl...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144393#Comment_122144393

it has the be the dullest league finish in years. Relegation decided long ago, same for CL spots, except maybe Spurs slight outside chance keepingthat alive until tthis week. And the league was pretty much done when Arsneal and Liverpool both lost at home to Villa and Palace within the one weekend.

DvB

My single biggest gripe with City (irrelevant of the clear as day financial doping/cheating etc etc etc) is that for all the talented players they have they are incredibly boring to watch. They are a team coached to the Nth degree, that are methodical to the Nth degree and are incredibly sterile to watch. There is practically zero excitement to any of their games for neutrals, its football by numbers.

There may be the odd exception but generally speaking irrelevant of the opposition they are a team I wouldn't care to watch anymore.

I thought that methodical approach may have peaked with Barca funnily enough, who I also found incredibly boring to watch at times, but City are a new animal altogether.

No question, its effective, but chri$t its dull.

Royale with Cheese

I remember many many years ago on here saying I found Pep's Barca team boring to watch and getting absolutely slated by the Barca fanbois for it. City are on another level to that.

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144457#Comment_122144457

Yeah UEFA's FFP limits are much stricter and they won't allow for any bullshit things like trying to sell your stadium to yourself either. Chelsea will fail them more than likely.

What happens if when Chelsea fail UEFA's FFP? Do they receive a fine or are they banned from playing in European football? If it's the latter, who receives the spot - is it 8th spot in the PL or the next ranked team in Europe irrespective of what league they are in?

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144502#Comment_122144502

Another thing to add to the long list of simple things you seemingly are unable to grasp.

Clubs like United and Chelsea are massively constrained by FFP, the idea that they can just spend money to catch up with City is uninformed to the extreme. United are one of the worlds biggest clubs in the world but have to sell before they buy, Chelsea have to sell land assets to stay compliant.

It is another example of why Citys cheating in previous years is still relevant today. Not only are they still cheating today, but they also have the benefits and the solid foundation provided for by the older cheating. They can continue to spend in ways the other clubs can't because of what happened before.

This is 2+2=4 level stuff. Strange that somebody who pretends not to defend City can't understand these very simple concepts.

loyatemu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144686#Comment_122144686

it'll go to the next team down in the PL. As things stand Chelsea are in the Conference League, but when if City win the FA Cup, the EL spot will revert to the league and whoever finishes 6th, with 7th getting the ECL.

theoneeyedman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144687#Comment_122144687

Yea, it's not like Chelsea have been spending recklessly or anything up to now....

Talisman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144686#Comment_122144686

Last year it was reported to UEFA and the Premier League that there are irregularities in the club's accounts regarding payments for players going back as far as the new owners had looked which at the time was 2012. In August, the club was fined €10M by UEFA for the reported breaches.

Any further breaches will warrant a tougher punishment from UEFA, a transfer ban is an obvious punishment. That was probably anticipated by the new owners and motivated their crazy shopping spree.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144774#Comment_122144774

They could have been burning £50 notes on the penalty spot and it wouldn't change the point made.

klose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144526#Comment_122144526

I’m suggesting the opposite of that?

Var should IMO be used as a 2nd ref for what they can’t see/miss.

ArmaniJeanss

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144863#Comment_122144863

OK. Maybe I'm having a blonde moment but you said "The automated VAR they have in Europe should be brought to England, and VAR not used for 2nd looks/refs missing things in general play. This clear and obvious thing needs to be binned.".

'VAR not used for 2nd looks'. Am I interpreting it wrong, it read like you didn't want VAR to be used?

ebbsy

I would use the automated technology for offsides. Its very difficult for linesmen to get this right.

Obviously keep the goal line technology as well.

The problem in England is that its the competence of the people using the technology. The less they are involved in it the better.

klose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144941#Comment_122144941

Apolagies I meant the automated VAR they use for offside calls in Europe should be used here, clear and concise computer generated image presents the offside decisions and it’s not up for debate.

VAR where they help the ref with missed decisions, penalties etc should remain, and my point about clear and obvious errors should be binned is because once the on field ref makes a decision unless it’s an absolute clanger of a call they don’t intervene, they should be intervening for a lot more decisions imo.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144953#Comment_122144953

Linesmen were getting it right for decades, it is genuinely impressive the success rate linesmen had doing the job live.

100% right, no, but damn close to it.

The problem is that some clowns thought that it needed to be 100%, but what they lost sight of is the fact that getting 100% of offside calls correct is not the point of having a football match.

They moved offside calls from 97% correct to 98%, but in doing so made the game itself less enjoyable. It destroyed the immediate joy of scoring a goal, it destroyed the pace of the game with all these anal pixel searches to find a body part on or offside.

Its a classic case of getting fixated on a minor issue and losing sight of the bigger picture and it is depressing that the people in charge can't understand that.

irelandrover

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145115#Comment_122145115

I've never been in a ground where the fans haven't celebrated a goal. I read that it happens a lot.

In my experience the fans celebrate, if it is confirmed as a goal then they celebrate again.

pjohnson

A huge improvement for VAR would be to put more rules around it.

• Only allow it to be used in real time no super slow motion.
• No nonsense freeze frames zoomed and enhanced like its an episode CSI desperatly tryna analyse if their leg hairs tangled together.
• Only two angles provided for review not a plethora of inconclusive rubbish angles showing nothing looped on repeat.
• Only two watches of each angle allowed not endless repeats. If theres no clear reason to alter his decision after seeing it twice its over.
• Whole VAR review process should take no more than 30 seconds if he cant see a need to change his mind after that length of time then thats it.

IncognitoMan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145268#Comment_122145268

We can and should streamline the VAR process to make it quicker 100% but we need to also look at the root cause of most of the mistakes.
The mistakes were not made through technology etc.. they are human errors.

If those using VAR are not trained to a higher standard then it will never work.

Make being a VAR ref it's own job / skill and train people for it

artanevilla

They need to get someone from an aviation background to write the processes. The VAR procedure should read like a pilots checklist or maintenance manual.

Deeper Blue

Maybe they could have 5 people in the var room, and they're given 10 seconds to push a button to say correct or incorrect decision, the majority wins out and that decision is communicated to the ref.

TitianGerm

Limit it to one VAR challenge per half per manager. If you're right and a decision is overturned then you don't lose your challenge. Challenges can't be carried over from the first half to the second half.

Fitz*

Sky last night had Rooney, Keane & Cole etc talking about VAR and they always lead with the 'threshold' angle to VAR. The threshold isn't the problem, as long as it's set at the start of the season and not changing two or three times.

The PGMOL have flip-flopped between 'VAR re-refereeing the game' and 'referee's decision being more important' constantly, but tie themselves up in knots with terminology and thresholds in-between. You can thank Howard Webb for that. in reality, it should be somewhere in between but having just one person accountable. Having one person, the on-field referee, accountable is something the PGMOL are very scared of and it's very obvious why. They want to hide behind VAR.

I don't understand why they can't implement a system for penalties/yellow/red cards where the VAR just asks the referee did he get a good view of the incident and is he happy with his decision? (when factors context is taken in like speed, intent, force, his own previous decisions within that game are applied. Some referees let things go and some are very strict, so let them apply that consistently within that one game)

• If Yes, then carry on with what the referee decided.
• If No, then go the VAR can show him a replay of it in real time on in the monitor. The referee can ask for slow-motion replays if he wants. He is not being told by a different person external to the game what the outcome should be and he is not being led by a still image with no context.

Two examples -

1. the Curtis Jones red card. On field referee saw it on the pitch, had a good view of it and deemed it a yellow card based on what had happened within that game so far. He was told, via a still image, that he was wrong and it should be red. He had to change his mind because an external person to the game told him he was wrong in that external person's opinion. The same logic was not applied to any other tackle incidents within that game.
2. Antony Gordon last night. The referee clearly didn't see it. He should have been asked did you see the rake down the heel? Yes or no. If yes, then the referee has decided that it wasn't strong enough to be a foul (even if everyone thought it should be, the referee is the referee and he is saying no so he can stand over his own decision. Grand, let's get on it as at the end of the day it's subjective). If no and he didn't see it, they show him the real time replay and he might ask for a slow-motion and then come to the conclusion that it should be a penalty.

The offsides will be semi-automated so they will be fine and should be a big improvement.

Weepsie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145115#Comment_122145115

Vars application too goes against the spirit of the law. No one is gaining an advantage they didn't have due to them having a toe a cm ahead of the last defender.

It rewards poor defending and punishes clever attacking.

eagle eye

The offside one is what really annoys me. Like if it's inside six inches and called on or off by the officials it should just stand.

Curtis Jones red card was the most obvious red card this season.. can't believe people are still moaning about it. Well one person. Should have got an extra game added for frivolous appeal

https://www.skysports.com/amp/football/news/11095/12976070/curtis-jones-liverpool-unsuccessful-with-bid-to-overturn-midfielder-s-red-card-at-tottenham-hotspur

Talisman

Ederson is out for the rest of the season.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cqlnljpzdk9o

AdamD

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145630#Comment_122145630

What if its 7 inches? All you've done is arbitrarily move the line

ArmaniJeanss

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145568#Comment_122145568

Very simple for attackers to stay onside at all times. But they've made a career since schoolboy level of playing off the shoulder of the last man and hoping that 1 in 3 decisions whether correct or not go their way (in games without VAR). And when VAR comes along they are failing to adapt.

So no sympathy from me for these poor attackers getting their goals varred off by 1cm - fk 'em, stay onside and stop trying to gain a 1cm advantage. As you might guess I'm a defender.

McFly85

The offside one bothers me because it’s unreasonable to ask players to judge themselves to a millimetre in real time, there should be some leeway(although I’ve no doubt referees would muck that up).

At least with the system coming in next year we should have consistency.

Fitz*

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145654#Comment_122145654

Obviously you cannot read. I wasn't moaning about it and I have previously said I was fine with it.

I was highlighting the example as it was a high-profile example of a process where one person overruled another while being external to the flow of the game.

Necro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145780#Comment_122145780

I love your confidence but I guarantee there's going to be a game next season where some eejit forgot to turn on the switch at the start of the game and it's not working or not calibrated properly🤣

It's still PGMOL after all

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145780#Comment_122145780

So you can see that it would be better for the game overall to have some leeway there? Even if that leeway will sometimes lead to complaints?

ebbsy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145115#Comment_122145115

Do you know what kills me with the offsides ? A toe off. A knee off. A hand off.

There should always be a clear gap between the forward and the defender to be called offside.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145882#Comment_122145882

But thats the hole they dug for themselves.

Once you proclaim that something is definable then you have to define it, you no longer get to have leeway, or judgement, or common sense. You have to say where the line is and stick to it right down to the very millimetre.

So whats is a clear gap? Where should the line be? Whats allowed or not allowed? All subjective decisions, and all causing just as much controversy as linesmen ever did. But they have to do all this petty, micro analysing of lines and armhair because if they don't, then the concept of VAR falls apart.

You can't have VAR using their judgement, because that just begs the question of why VAR is needed at all, why not just let the linesmen use their judgment.

eagle eye

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145689#Comment_122145689

6 inches is half of a foot. If the distance is that or less there's no measurement. Once you go beyond that then check it. There won't be many mistakes outside of half of a foot.

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145630#Comment_122145630

Not sure the tolerance, but in the current system there is a degree of overlap or tolerance. In the uefa version there is not.

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145882#Comment_122145882

Imo that would be horrific.

1. How do you define a clear gap. There will always be an element he was off by a mm.
2. The level of advantage it would give to attackers is huuuuge. It's insane imo.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145980#Comment_122145980

Without measurement how do they know if it is more or less than 6 inches?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145831#Comment_122145831

Perfect use of VAR. One of the rare examples of it this season. Like a ref missing the danger of a high tackle in rugby

Weepsie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145752#Comment_122145752

You're asking them to make the type of judgement that **** all humans can make. The whole reason for the offside rule to be brought in was to prevent pisstaking pretty much for the types of players who would just hang around the goal.

There is no advantage to the 1cm, more than there would be for most of the chalked off goals if they were bang in line. It's entirely against the spirit of the rule.

Sick of defenders looking for absolutely everything to be reviewed because they don't want to read the game anymore.

y0ssar1an22

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122144502#Comment_122144502

chelsea were financed to the tune of 1.5bn by abramovic.

utd have let their stadium rot.

arsenal invested in their stadium to the detriment of their team.

newcastle are only getting started and if allowed will usurp city.

normal teams cannot compete with city.

jacool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122145268#Comment_122145268

Unfortunately, it took a third angle, that VAR probably ignored, to show that Gordon was fouled last night.

As I said when VAR was introduced it was because Sky had so many cameras at each game that they were highlighting refereeing errors that managers then jumped upon as excuses for losing games. Now, with VAR in, but being mis-run, Sky have their "Ask The Ref" show where Dermot Gallagher acts as a fully paid up member of the referees union and defends them to the hilt. They are going to take the royal p*** out of him with the Gordon one on Monday.

If the clubs voted VAR out, which they won't, Sky would just continue showing referee error after referee error anyway. They have to fill 24 hours every day.

Augme

Offsides should and will be automatic and that's how it should be. For everything else, a manager should be given 2(or 3) "challenges" that they can use every game. If the challenge something the ref goes to the monitor to review and then makes a decision based on the TV angles. It doesn't have to be clear and obvious, it's up to the ref to decide how he interprets it.

TheRona

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122146006#Comment_122146006

I don't think most of these people have thought through the fact that moving the line of offside will make absolutely no difference to the controversy. The only benefit of this suggestion is that it will favour attackers more by allowing them a 6 inch head-start on defenders, and this will lead to more goals.