FA Cup 2020/21

[Robin.Hood]

 

Little wee tear eh

[Moomintroll]

Have to admit to having a little something in my eye watching the owner celebrating with the players. Clearly means a lot to him & he and his father before him are the opposite to most other foreign owners.

[Venti]

Chelsea vs City:

[Leicesterlichtie]

Absolutely fantastic day for football. Great result and brilliant scenes of what it means to city players, backroom staff and owner.

[Thistle_do_nicely]

*nervous twitching intensifies*

 

Edited May 15, 2021 by Thistle_do_nicely

[Miguel Sanchez]

54 minutes ago, Mr. Alli said:

WHY WERE YOU CUNTS LETTING ME WATCH THIS ON BT WHEN IT WAS ON BBC

If you've reached the age you have without realising the FA Cup final is on council telly you deserve whatever misery you were subjected to.

[HalfCutNinja]

58 minutes ago, Ro Sham Bo said:

First manager to win Scottish and FA Cup 

Aye apart from the four Scottish Cups and five FA Cups Alex Ferguson won obviously

[pandarilla]

*nervous twitching intensifies*
 

A still image doesn't do this guy justice. He needs gif'd

[Detournement]

This is why VAR is a joke. 

[Jambomo]

3 minutes ago, Detournement said:

This is why VAR is a joke. 

The picture is so blurred you can’t see where the foot stops and the ball starts, never mind whether the foot is actually still making contact with the ball. 

[Detournement]

Just now, Jambomo said:

The picture is so blurred you can’t see where the foot stops and the ball starts, never mind whether the foot is actually still making contact with the ball. 

Exactly. 

The frame with the offside line is scrutinised down to below 5cm but no attention is given to the moment of contact with the ball. It's absurd. 

There is a third potential error with the angle of the camera as well. No one would accept the photo finish camera at the 100m in the Olympics being set up at 95m or 105m.

[Jambomo]

12 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Exactly. 

The frame with the offside line is scrutinised down to below 5cm but no attention is given to the moment of contact with the ball. It's absurd. 

There is a third potential error with the angle of the camera as well. No one would accept the photo finish camera at the 100m in the Olympics being set up at 95m or 105m.

What I mean is, this is a screenshot from the TV isn’t it?

The live pictures had more clarity than that, when we saw it live the players weren’t as blurred as they are in that picture.  It’s not much of an argument if they are using screenshots which you can’t see clearly to argue about the point of the ball leaving the foot. 

I agree VAR at that level is daft but it’s been the same all season and this isn’t proof of anything wrong or different.

[Detournement]

3 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

What I mean is, this is a screenshot from the TV isn’t it?

The live pictures had more clarity than that, when we saw it live the players weren’t as blurred as they are in that picture.  It’s not much of an argument if they are using screenshots which you can’t see clearly to argue about the point of the ball leaving the foot. 

I agree VAR at that level is daft but it’s been the same all season and this isn’t proof of anything wrong or different.

Aye but it shows the frame where the ball was supposedly kicked and the ball is clearly already off the ground.

I'd say every VAR decision that comes down to less than 10cm is dodgy.

[Ginaro]

30 minutes ago, Detournement said:

There is a third potential error with the angle of the camera as well. No one would accept the photo finish camera at the 100m in the Olympics being set up at 95m or 105m.

They wouldn't, but last time I checked the offside line in football moves with the second last defender so that's a silly comparison. And the entire point of the Hawkeye system is that you have lines which take into account the camera angle - that part of the system is surely the least contentious.

[Detournement]

5 minutes ago, Ginaro said:

They wouldn't, but last time I checked the offside line in football moves with the second last defender so that's a silly comparison. And the entire point of the Hawkeye system is that you have lines which take into account the camera angle - that part of the system is surely the least contentious.

In tennis you have one variable which is the ball. The lines are fixed and the cameras are positioned to have the most accurate measurements.

In football you have three variables. The ball being kicked. The attacker and second last defender who may both be moving and the camera which won't be aligned with the incidents it's measuring.

There is no way it's accurate to the level they are applying it and there will definitely have been good goals chopped off because of the inherent errors.

[Lurkst]

43 minutes ago, Detournement said:

There is no way it's accurate to the level they are applying it and there will definitely have been good goals chopped off because of the inherent errors.

I guess in the long run the success of VAR will depend on whether there are fewer inherent errors than there are when it's not being used.

 

[Detournement]

4 minutes ago, Lurkst said:

I guess in the long run the success of VAR will depend on whether there are fewer inherent errors than there are when it's not being used.

 

 

[Binos]

c**t never even tried to close the ball down properly

Just shandied out with his fucking arms behind his back

[HalfCutNinja]

Highlights are on now. That VAR decision is laughable, the ball is a foot off the ground when the line is drawn. Meaning its left his foot before then, if you pull it back even a millisecond as you would need to in order to get the moment it actually left his foot he's clearly onside.

Chelsea have been robbed. 

Fucking brilliant.

[Jacksgranda]

Anyway, congratulations to Leicester City and their fans, particularly those who remember 1969 (or even 1961 and1963).