• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
The defender cannot just gamble on the fact someone might be offside and leave the ball though can he?? It's an absolutely flipping joke of a rule. I honestly can't understand how they've buggered the rules up to such a degree nowadays that they're ruining the game. It should be simple. If you're offside when someone tries to pass it to you, you're offside. Why can't it just be that?? It makes me want to cry.

 

It’s an analysis of the VAR and offside calls that happened in the Wolves game

And the Salah one has been going on for years -can you remember the Kane/Lovren Penalty where Kane was in an offside position
 
It’s an analysis of the VAR and offside calls that happened in the Wolves game

And the Salah one has been going on for years -can you remember the Kane/Lovren Penalty where Kane was in an offside position
I don't really care about the Liverpool Wolves game. I'm talking about a rule of the game that is fundamentally broken.
 
So let me get this straight, its offside because Liverpool have a blind spot for VAR cameras.... Class :ROFLMAO:

It’s offside because the linesman flagged for offside and VAR camera angle couldn’t prove that the player was onside - the same with an offside in the Arsenal game a couple months back.
I don't really care about the Liverpool Wolves game. I'm talking about a rule of the game that is fundamentally broken.

And I’m saying it’s a rule that’s been around for a number of years now - it’s not something that’s just been changed and it was the same debate when it happened for Spurs
 
I'm pretty sure Orikoru knows why the decisions were made:

1. Salah's goal stood because the offside rule, as written, is a farce
2. Wolves goal disallowed because the cameras used for VAR are a farce

I'm not sure you're twitter link is of any use as a response? If anything, it just clarifies what was already being said. Your link would only have been of any use had Orikoru been saying "Salah's goal should have been disallowed under the current rules", and also if he'd been saying "why did VAR not allow Wolves goal". If that is what was being said, that twitter link would have helped to clarify things, although the twitter link also repeats what was being said in here yesterday by Golf Monthly members anyway
 
Asuming that they are looking at a team with a view to competing in the Champions League at some stage, are you allowed to own two teams in the same competition. Honestly do not know but it would be strange if you could.
 
I don't think it will be. We got the Czech guy owning 27% and golds shares will be sold off no doubt soon


I thought that his son in law (via his daughter) might get Golds shares. He was recently appointed to the board and is a big fan apparently. Re Kretinsky, I would welcome him taking over the whole show really. Get rid of Sully and have a fresh start, lot of fans would welcome it.
 
I think that is a sensible decision. Injuries have taken their toll and the World Cup was probably the confirmation he needed. He also seems to be one of the players who is not dependent on football for his life so he should transition better than most.

Great career, good luck to him.
 
I think that is a sensible decision. Injuries have taken their toll and the World Cup was probably the confirmation he needed. He also seems to be one of the players who is not dependent on football for his life so he should transition better than most.

Great career, good luck to him.
Seemed pretty clear as well that he just took that short term MLS contract to keep his fitness until the World Cup. His heart's probably not in it anymore. What a player he was though. Arguably best Welsh player ever.
 
Top