closed Spurs 1-0 Chelsea

[Vesper 27,283]

18 minutes ago, Special Juan said:

They actually got VAR wrong, how the fuck is that possible

One might say the fix was in? I am just boiling mad since last night. Especially as it is those fucking yid cunts. I hate that team and their shit fans with a passion.

Three loses in a row to those NoLo twats.

2002-2008 one loss total, including 4 years in row no loss

2010 to 2017 one loss total with a 5 year span with no losses

Grrrrrrrr

Thats 13 years ( basically half my life) total with but 2 losses and also a total of around 9 of those years with zero

And the big one

1990 (before I was born) to 2002.

Zero losses!

Most of my entire life we almost never lost to them, with a few exceptions. Now they are reversing this.

 

 

[Special Juan 27,093]

What makes it all so ironic is the word 'controversy' is still being used

[Adnane 1,101]

OMG the whining. 

He was not offside ffs, the angle on the TV clearly showed it, VAR replay even draws multiple parallel lines for you to make sure they are aligned with the main midfield line. 

The narrative that we got robbed yesterday is absolutely pathetic.

We played well for the whole 85% of the pitch and actually failed in the 15% that matters : their penalty area. This is nothing new and will keep hunting us for the whole season unless we either get a top goalscorer or find a workaround to actually play natural strikers Giroud and/or Morata and still improve the speed of our ball movement and our pressing. 

The latter is probably not realistic, we need to go to the market then or be average for at least 6 months.

[Unionjack 7,531]

39 minutes ago, Vesper said:

All our lives we deal with straight human error, it is part of the game. BUT, in this case the technology actually was misused and not only didn't correct a human error (as there was none) BUT itself MADE an error that literally may end up knocking us out of a cup and cost a chance for Sarri to win his first ever trophy. 

There really should be ways to appeal decisions specially for cases like this which are so blatant!

Things like this makes me wonder whether that bloke Mou wasn't right when he always turned it into a Chelsea against the world.

Just cause you're paranoid it doesn't mean those nasty men aren't trying to get ya!

[Vesper 27,283]

13 minutes ago, Adnane said:

OMG the whining. 

He was not offside ffs, the angle on the TV clearly showed it, VAR replay even draws multiple parallel lines for you to make sure they are aligned with the main midfield line. 

The narrative that we got robbed yesterday is absolutely pathetic.

Complete rot mate.

They showed the multi-line analysis that clearly showed his upper torso offsides.

You must not know the basics of the offsides rule.

You will not be able to gaslight this board.

[Adnane 1,101]

2 minutes ago, Vesper said:

Complete rot mate.

They showed the multi-line analysis that clearly showed his upper torso offsides.

You must not know the basics of the offsides rule.

You will not be able to gas-light this board.

 

Can we please establish in which world the below situation is an offside ? 

 

 

[Adnane 1,101]

Kane actually covers the referee's vision, so he doesn't see Azpilicueta. 

The spaniard is playing Kane on, they're in the same line. 

I have no idea where that Chelsea line is coming from, I'd rather trust this picture with many clear lines showing you that they are accurate rather than the other one.

[Special Juan 27,093]

3 minutes ago, Adnane said:

 

Can we please establish in which world the below situation is an offside ? 

 

 

Can please establish in which world the below is offside?

[Vesper 27,283]

3 minutes ago, Adnane said:

 

Can we please establish in which world the below situation is an offside ? 

 

 

Not that analysis, the telly showed (not even the one Sarri had) a multiple verticle line shot that showed his shoulder and torso clearly offside of the verticle plane.

[Special Juan 27,093]

2 minutes ago, Adnane said:

Kane actually covers the referee's vision, so he doesn't see Azpilicueta. 

The spaniard is playing Kane on, they're in the same line. 

I have no idea where that Chelsea line is coming from, I'd rather trust this picture with many clear lines showing you that they are accurate rather than the other one.

The decision isn't the referees, it's the linesmans. Azpilicueta is not playing Kane on, Kane is offside, that's why the linesman flagged.

Where do you get such strong weed from?

[Vesper 27,283]

8 minutes ago, Special Juan said:

The decision isn't the referees, it's the linesmans. Azpilicueta is not playing Kane on, Kane is offside, that's why the linesman flagged.

Where do you get such strong weed from?

They are trying to gaslight a clear error. The linesman flag fucked up all that happened after, plus they used a wrong angled shot. It was NOT his feet, it was his shoulder and torso, which IS what the rule includes.

[Adnane 1,101]

11 minutes ago, Vesper said:

Not that analysis, the telly showed (not even the one Sarri had) a multiple verticle line shot that showed his shoulder and torso clearly offside of the verticle plane.

That was before they calibrated lines, they put this on the telly itself and started calibrating the lines until they reached this final image where you can clearly see Kane not offside. 

 

10 minutes ago, Special Juan said:

The decision isn't the referees, it's the linesmans. Azpilicueta is not playing Kane on, Kane is offside, that's why the linesman flagged.

Where do you get such strong weed from?

There is no such thing as separation between a referee's and linesman's decision in a game. The referee actually makes the decision in all cases with the help of his assistants. 

The linesman's vision was covered by Kane, he could not see that Azpilicueta was actually playing Kane on. 

Do you think I'd rather trust a totally subjective Chelsea board ( or laptop for that matter ) rather than an actual decision made by refereeing specialists in an independent box based on multiple replays ( and the actual clear picture we have on our hands here ? ). 

We're just turning into Arsenal ( and spurs for that matter ) with these lame excuses and "we played better" narrative. 

Totally not Chels values. 

Really not interested in the weed, gas lighting and whatnot discussions, seems like we can't have an objective discussion on the internet anymore without this sort of silly comments ( even worse coming from an actual moderator ). 

[Special Juan 27,093]

Just now, Adnane said:

That was before they calibrated lines, they put this on the telly itself and started calibrating the lines until they reached this final image where you can clearly see Kane not offside. 

 

There is no such thing as separation between a referee's and linesman's decision in a game. The referee actually makes the decision in all cases with the help of his assistants. 

The linesman's vision was covered by Kane, he could not see that Azpilicueta was actually playing Kane on. 

Do you think I'd rather trust a totally subjective Chelsea board ( or laptop for that matter ) rather than an actual decision made by refereeing specialists seeing in an independent box based on multiple replays ( and the actual clear picture we have on our hands here ? ). 

We're just turning into Arsenal ( and spurs for that matter ) with these lame excuses and "we played better" narrative. 

Totally not the Chels values. 

Jesus Christ

[Superblue 6,331]

If the referee's using VAR technology away from the ground don't have the high level of technology somebody like Sky does then what is the point?

We watch Sky Sports week in, week out and they seem to be able to show within 10 seconds if somebody was offside, ball over the line, etc. 

Otherwise you are still basing the decision on the interpretation of a referee as opposed to a clear cut 'yes' or 'no'.

How they aren't using a central camera in line with play is farcical. It's not rocket science for them to realise that although Kane's foot may be onside, his body is leaning forward so another body part may be offside.

And even then in this situation if two camera angles suggest two different interpretations it's not clear cut so surely then they must revert back to their original decision which is trusting the linesman that it was offside as he flagged.

[Special Juan 27,093]

A camera basically on a corner flag How is that effective?

[cosmicway 1,247]

The Mark Spitz dive:
 

 

[cosmicway 1,247]

Bl**dy circus clowns !
 

 

[Jase 43,479]

4 hours ago, Belgiannutt said:

Overlapping runs are all about pace and timing. Creating that temporary 2 on 1 situation where the defending fullback has to make a decision "do i track the overlapping run or stay with the player on the ball".

Agree with you and on the above, high tempo and lots of movement are also important to creating the 2 v 1 situation. Otherwise, opponents will always be in place to deal with our attacks - e.g full back defend against the wide player and the wide player defend against the full back.