Bournemouth H Match Thread

[bfox]

2 minutes ago, pSinatra said:

Looks like i'm the only one who didn't think it was a red.  It's nasty but it's also just one of those things.  He was trying to protect the ball, not break someone's ankle

indeed, he was just shielding the ball, Callum put his ankle right where tielemans was pivoting

Edited 31 August 2019 by bfox

[blabyboy]

excellent closing down by Vardy all game so far.

[That_Dude]

That was a red. Lucky Tiely.

[GeorgeTheFox]

Go on Demarai take this chance

[GeorgeTheFox]

Solanke is exactly the type of shit striker who would score against us

[Bazly]

Gray coming on, watch out row L the ball could be flying your way

[Carl the Llama]

I was convinced he'd get sent off based purely on the contact but I'm pleased VAR seems to have accounted for intent.

[splinterdream]

I don't think Youri even meant to challange the player, looked like he was stepping over the ball and turning at the same time, could easily have seen red

[Manini]

Despite what some might think, I’m desperate for Dimi to come good. Good luck lad! 

[Vacamion]

Now Gray.  You need to take your chance. 

[Mickey O'Neil]

5 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

He's trying to guard the ball, he has no idea his ankle will be there. 

This is how I saw it. 

 

 

I have no no idea if intent comes into play in situations like this. Maybe not actually thinking about it. High is high is off??

[Shamomoa]

he's very tall and solanke!... ill see myself out...

[PhillippaT]

Ooh - good save.

[Bazly]

I see a Harvey like figure on the park, is he going to join in sometime today?

[Dahnsouff]

5 minutes ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

You know that has nothing to do with VAR and everything to do with the subjectivities of the laws of the game, right? 

 

5 minutes ago, jonny_wright said:

The contact was, but it was accidental, no intent for me 

If you think that the fact  it was a red is even up for debate, I would suggest you are overly partisan.

[Suzie the Fox]

1 minute ago, Carl the Llama said:

I was convinced he'd get sent off based purely on the contact but I'm pleased VAR seems to have accounted for intent.

Yes the same, but VAR needs to be more consistent. I would guess that on another day that challenge would have been a red. 

[Les-TA-Jon]

1 minute ago, Dahnsouff said:

 

If you think that the fact  it was a red is even up for debate, I would suggest you are overly partisan.

I’ve not seen the incident yet. It’s just that you were saying VAR was bad - but this has nothing to do with VAR. 

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Les-TA-Jon said:

I’ve not seen the incident yet. It’s just that you were saying VAR was bad - but this has nothing to do with VAR. 

By VAR, I count the humans reviewing the footage as part of VAR.

[Sly]

My Arabic steam is around 3 minutes behind

[Manini]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

By VAR, I count the humans reviewing the footage as part of VAR.

Exactly. It’s still an incompetent referee reviewing the footage. 

[Les-TA-Jon]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

By VAR, I count the humans reviewing the footage as part of VAR.

So it’s not VAR that you’re criticising then. It’s the subjective nature of the laws of the game and the way that refs inconsistently interpret them. 

[Carl the Llama]

Love it when a diver actually gets carded.

[blabyboy]

oh so close, if that ball hadn't been intercepted.

[That_Dude]

Cags is a god.

[jonny_wright]

4 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

 

If you think that the fact  it was a red is even up for debate, I would suggest you are overly partisan.

There’s VAR and they said no red, so it wasn’t?? That’s clear surely