Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, Fear Of The Fox said:

I don't disagree with what you're saying. I'm just saying they have the evidence of the double touch because of the specific tech. We're the ones assuming regarding the incident because we only have 2 replays which aren't clear and tbf we can't see a double touch. 

Don't forget that this offside tech uses around 25 sensor cams. Initially these sensors check when the ball touch/pass occurred. It's not something revolutionary, it's just the tech football videogames use for decades implemented in real life. The sensors picked up a second ball touch and this is displayed as a graph. 

Deny the evidence of your eyes and ears. 

 

Easily proved isn't it? The cricket have managed it for decades with snickometer.

 

It's not right and it's not credible. Show me a video that backs this up in any way.

Posted

One thing that Atleti had on their side was the card attached to the foul on Mbappe for the penalty.

No intent to play the ball, Mbappe through aka goal scoring opportunity. Would have been harsh but in reality was probably a red.

Posted

Another one of those “ rules are the rules” contentious decisions. I remember when it happened to Mahrez. it’s unfortunate not intentional. If they tweaked the rule to allow it of players are slipping and out of control the powers that be will say it’s a new type of skill to deliberately beat the keeper.

in this case Alvarez must have touched the ball ever so slightly it’s undetectable to the human eye. Question is just like off side does the VAR rule/system need to be that anal? IMO I don’t think so.

despite the drama atjetico were still in it and should have scored their next penalty and the keeper saved rudders. That’s what knocked them out sadly.

Posted
13 hours ago, foxile5 said:

Deny the evidence of your eyes and ears. 

 

Easily proved isn't it? The cricket have managed it for decades with snickometer.

 

It's not right and it's not credible. Show me a video that backs this up in any way.

Apparently he admitted the double touch although obviously not at the time .

Posted
14 hours ago, foxile5 said:

Deny the evidence of your eyes and ears. 

 

Easily proved isn't it? The cricket have managed it for decades with snickometer.

 

It's not right and it's not credible. Show me a video that backs this up in any way.

If I'm not mistaken the player already said it was a double touch. Do I agree with the rule? Ofc not. I also don't agree with the offside, handball and simulation ones and all these have made the sport kinda unwatchable for me. 

It's been an awful football season with our Leicester team failing big time also. Can't wait for MLB to start now to enjoy at least a sport I like. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Spudulike said:

20250313_162415.jpg

Erm... lol sure few more other English clubs will have few things to say about that... plus they forgot Villa actually already won it in 82.. so TNT researcher got that wrong... different title put still the same competition at the end of the day.

 

For the English clubs left, Arsenal and Villa. Both of them probably would have wanted the first leg at home strangely. Due to the fact risk for both getting battered away in the first legs and being out of it the second leg. 

Edited by Leicesterpool
Posted

As much as I enjoyed that run, it isn't really a thing, is it? I doubt many outside of our fanbase really remember it.

  • Like 1
Posted

To be fair that’s a colour graphic. As we know Forests wins were in black & white, the grainy Pathe News footage accompanied by piano music, sped up film and in the crowd row after row of flat capped moustached locals dressed in suits with pipes and rattles  (and as for the males, similar). I saw a 30th anniversary of it on Betamax somewhere. :whistle:

  • Haha 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Leicesterpool said:

Erm... lol sure few more other English clubs will have few things to say about that... plus they forgot Villa actually already won it in 82.. so TNT researcher got that wrong... different title put still the same competition at the end of the day.

 

For the English clubs left, Arsenal and Villa. Both of them probably would have wanted the first leg at home strangely. Due to the fact risk for both getting battered away in the first legs and being out of it the second leg. 

Nope, completely accurate. Notts F have NEVER played in the UCL. It's been a different competition since 1992. Love it when you explain it to them :crylaugh:

Posted
4 hours ago, Corky said:

As much as I enjoyed that run, it isn't really a thing, is it? I doubt many outside of our fanbase really remember it.

Being the only English club left in the champions league that season made it special.

 

Well when comparing to Man City, in their first season in the champions league they were knocked out in the group stage. So to reach a quarter finals is still an amazing achievement for any new club. Some pundits had us down to get knocked out in the group stage...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...