English Premier League 2019-20

[Scotty Tunbridge]

Justice etc.

[lichtie23]

The f**k is Abraham doing on the line?

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

I would feel bad for West Ham. Then I remember it's West Ham.

Edited July 1, 2020 by Sherrif John Bunnell

[Bully Wee Villa]

I don't think Chelsea have won a single game against teams near the bottom of the table that don't have "Aston" in their name. The twats.

Why the f**k did Rudiger just kick it out for a corner when West Ham are living for corners?

Edited July 1, 2020 by Bully Wee Villa

[craigkillie]

They're focusing on the wrong thing by looking at whether Kepa is affected here. Surely the issue is that Azpilicueta is being prevented from blocking the ball by a player lying in front of him. The biggest issue is that if VAR have been deliberating on this decision for so long, they should surely be able to communicate the reason for the decision clearly to the commentators and players immediately.

[Hammerafc]

I don't think Chelsea have won a single game against teams near the bottom of the table that don't have "Aston" in their name. The twats.
Why the f**k did Rudiger just kick it out for a corner when West Ham are living for corners?

Rudiger had an absolute mare. All the time in the world and he kicks it out for a corner.

[Jambomo]

6 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

They're focusing on the wrong thing by looking at whether Kepa is affected here. Surely the issue is that Azpilicueta is being prevented from blocking the ball by a player lying in front of him. The biggest issue is that if VAR have been deliberating on this decision for so long, they should surely be able to communicate the reason for the decision clearly to the commentators and players immediately.

When they read out the rule on it, it mentioned the point of whether the player was blocking the view of the keeper so that’s why they were talking about it.

[Albertlegend]

Why are they playing goal music to an empty stadium? 

[Bishop Briggs]

9 minutes ago, Bully Wee Villa said:

I don't think Chelsea have won a single game against teams near the bottom of the table that don't have "Aston" in their name. The twats.

Why the f**k did Rudiger just kick it out for a corner when West Ham are living for corners?

Chelsea have lost home games against teams near the bottom. If they had won them, they'd be challenging Man City for second place.

But they beat Norwich, Southampton and Watford away so be patient.

[eez-eh]

25 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

They're focusing on the wrong thing by looking at whether Kepa is affected here. Surely the issue is that Azpilicueta is being prevented from blocking the ball by a player lying in front of him. The biggest issue is that if VAR have been deliberating on this decision for so long, they should surely be able to communicate the reason for the decision clearly to the commentators and players immediately.

I also thought that the first time the goalscorer (can’t mind his name) hit the ball and it then deflected off Antonio and back, Antonio looked marginally offside. But from the images we saw they looked to only be checking the second strike of the ball and not the first.

[bairney]

West 'am Chelsi is best game I've seen since the lockdan, ainnit?

Edited July 1, 2020 by bairney

[craigkillie]

30 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

When they read out the rule on it, it mentioned the point of whether the player was blocking the view of the keeper so that’s why they were talking about it.

The "rule" they read out was completely made up - there's nothing about blocking the view of the goalkeeper, just blocking the view of an opponent. The more relevant part right of the start was also left out - the actual rule in question is "preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision". I'd say it was fairly clear that Azpilicueta's line of vision was obstructed and that he was prevented from being able to play the ball as a result.

[Diamonds are Forever]

1 hour ago, DG.Roma said:

Absolutely pish. No advantage was gained there, it wasn't an obvious error. VAR trying too hard again

 

1 hour ago, cameron2000 said:

Correct decision, affected Azpilecueta’s ability to play the ball. He had to lift his leg over him making it harder to block the shot.

 

I think there is truth in both here, as daft as that may sound. I think technically it is the correct decision, looked to me that Azpilicueta couldn't block the ball as he normally would because Antonio was lying there, and therefore is offside.

However, it is highly debatable and very subjective, and anything that takes 5 minutes to decide upon surely cannot be an obvious error, almost by definition? Which raises the fundamental issue with the way VAR is being used. Is it really meant to be for obvious errors, and if so, who defines obvious and how is it defined? Or is it just there to get every single decision correct no matter how long it takes? If it is the first option, then you'll end up with situations where VAR knowingly gives decisions which they probably know are wrong - which seems stupid. If it's the second option, it will ruin the pace of the game and lead to situations like tonight which look farcical.

Edited July 1, 2020 by Diamonds are Forever

[craigkillie]

Pretty sure that's offside.

EDIT: Nope, he's fine. Thought he had waited far too long to release him.

Edited July 1, 2020 by craigkillie

[lichtie23]

Oh my! Massive result for West Ham is they hold on

[bairney]

Quality

 

[Mark Connolly]

Took that well, thought he had made an arse of it when he cut inside

[Bully Wee Villa]

Lost home and away to Bournemouth, lost home and away to West Ham. f**k you very much Chelsea.

[eez-eh]

That Chelsea defence is something else.

[Grangemouth Bairn]

2 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

That Chelsea defence is something else.

The fact they are still challenging for top 4 shows how pish that league is .