Woke up this morning to the deletion of the original general thread, so here's an all new one.

Lob your general AFC stuff in here folks instead 

 

That last night is not a penalty, never in a million years.

Yes the hands up, but you have to raise your arms to jump, that’s natural, its not fuckin Riverdance.

The well boys arm is then knocked by the jumping Tim (its not an elbow either, the Tim jumped with and into him - he actually elbowed the Well lad in the guts too so that could easily have been given as a foul too).

That knock to the arm moves his hand towards the trajectory of the ball but its still obviously headed clear.

Anyone who’s ever played football knows a ball only flies through the air like that when its been cleanly headed. No ball could or would fly like that off the palm of your hand. Its just impossible.

Its a scandalous call, even for Scotland, one that would never have been given at the other end, and one that was given either because of:

Blatant cheating to engineer a last day decider, or

Bottling officials too scared of the flak they knew they’d get from those unhinged weegie minkers if it wasn’t given.

Its how football works up here. Always has been and its why the rest of us are all just wasting our time…

It's handball all day long for me.  You can't go to head the ball with your hand in between the ball and your head and not expect to concede a foul.  

If he did handle it, he didn't gain an advantage from handling it.

22 minutes ago, tlg1903 said:

It's handball all day long for me.  You can't go to head the ball with your hand in between the ball and your head and not expect to concede a foul.  

He didn't go to head the ball with his hand in between the ball and his head though.

2 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

He didn't go to head the ball with his hand in between the ball and his head though.

Of course he didn't intend it but it's what happened.  My point was if you did intend it it would be a foul. That his hand was in that position was not due to a foul so intent is completely irrelevant.  It was, and, to my eye anyway, a foul and a penalty.  Hell, even my jambo neighbour has accepted (grudgingly) that it was the correct decision. 

It’s good that VAR has cleared up the rules and ended all the controversy 

8 hours ago, tlg1903 said:

Of course he didn't intend it but it's what happened.  My point was if you did intend it it would be a foul. That his hand was in that position was not due to a foul so intent is completely irrelevant.  It was, and, to my eye anyway, a foul and a penalty.  Hell, even my jambo neighbour has accepted (grudgingly) that it was the correct decision. 

Go read the rules then. Just cause the ball hits your hand (and i’m not convinced it does given the way the ball pinged off him exactly like a clean header does) doesn’t make it a penalty and in that situation under the rules - if interpreted correctly - that is not a penalty…

Edited May 15May 15 by The.Moog

Just shows that the rules and VAR are both shite and need binning.

Perhaps it mean if Hearts fluff it, we may get a real crack at changing things due to the uproar?

28 minutes ago, Don Julio said:

Just shows that the rules and VAR are both shite and need binning.

Perhaps it mean if Hearts fluff it, we may get a real crack at changing things due to the uproar?

There won't be an uproar though, that would only occur if it was the other way round. 

The rules around handball were changed specifically for VAR. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the deliberate handball rule. However, if you have still shots and video evidence then the closer you can have to it being "any touch on the hand", then the easier it is to identify handballs, to the extent that the obvious trajectory would be for an algorithm to do it. That is the goal of the VAR guys, ever increasing involvement and automation. Of course, in the interim, it benefits the big teams. It takes the existing bias in the game, and amplifies it, because there are more opportunities to give decisions and more procrastination, and thus doubts, over decision making. You can (incorrectly!) make the case for it being a Tim's pen, as @tlg1903 has, but only an absolute fool would try and pretend that a penalty would have been given at the other end of the pitch. 

To think that we had people suggesting VAR was essential because it would stop the scum cheating!

There was an official from down South on BBC Scotland yesterday, who correctly dissected why VAR should not have been involved. His answer was more cameras, and less VAR involvement. He repeated the absolutely ridiculous statement that "VAR was only meant to be for the really obvious mistakes"! I nearly punched the radio. As was pointed out by people like me well before VAR existed: there is no definition of obvious, ever; if we could agreement on the indefinable, there would not be enough decisions to ever merit the expense of the technology and additional cameras to make it work (which is why we don't have goal line technology in Scotland). When I pointed this out years ago and asked for any decision that met the threshold of absolutely obvious error, I suggested that there is always one, and only one, incident that everyone goes back to and seems to be the entire reason for VARs implementation. Lo and behold, the chap on the radio went all the way back to Thierry Henry versus Ireland to make his absolutely woeful case for "better VAR". 

It's a failed experiment, that was always going to be. In the next year or two, it'll be expanded to checking corners. Then it'll be free kicks and yellow cards. Edit: with advertising alongside each call.

Edited May 15May 15 by RicoS321

I always blame Frank Lampards goal against Germany for it 

1 hour ago, Mason89 said:

I always blame Frank Lampards goal against Germany for it 

Nah, that was responsible for goal line technology. They solved that one. A technology that works perfectly, because it gets used once or twice a season, and it's conclusive.

1 hour ago, RicoS321 said:

Nah, that was responsible for goal line technology. They solved that one. A technology that works perfectly, because it gets used once or twice a season, and it's conclusive.

I blame the English for everything though 

If Hearts do win the league tomorrow, Celtic will have lost the Scottish Cup, League Cup and the League in a 12 month period.

Remember when they used to get so bored of winning, they would leave semi finals at half time. 

24/05/2025 was the day it all started to go wrong for the entitled ones. 

 

 

This is irrelevant now but I am asking it anyway.....when the Celtic score was 2-2 the other night and Hearts were 3-0 up, Hearts had a goal difference of +35 versus Celtic's +29.  Why am I hearing from various media outlets that it meant Celtic would have had to win 3-0 on Saturday if things stayed like that? 🤔 I'd have thought they would have needed to score six before goals scored then got looked at?

Edited May 15May 15 by wokinginashearerwonderland

5 minutes ago, wokinginashearerwonderland said:

This is irrelevant now but I am asking it anyway.....when the Celtic score was 2-2 the other night and Hearts were 3-0 up, Hearts had a goal difference of +35 versus Celtic's +29.  Why am I hearing from various media outlets that it meant Celtic would have had to win 3-0 on Saturday if things stayed like that? 🤔 I'd have thought they would have needed to score six before goals scored then got looked at?

3-0 Celtic would have meant both teams being on +32, so would have gone to goals scored to split them 😉

11 minutes ago, BigAl said:

3-0 Celtic would have meant both teams being on +32, so would have gone to goals scored to split them 😉

But Hearts are on +35 and Celtic would have been on +29 so would have been 6 goals behind?

7 minutes ago, wokinginashearerwonderland said:

But Hearts are on +35 and Celtic would have been on +29 so would have been 6 goals behind?

I'm starting to think you're taking the piss min 😂

Three onto The Victims, three off The Jambos, means both are + 32 and The Victims have scored more goals

6 minutes ago, BigAl said:

I'm starting to think you're taking the piss min 😂

Three onto The Victims, three off The Jambos, means both are + 32 and The Victims have scored more goals

Nah, the cogs were just stuck there for a moment Al 😂 

2 minutes ago, wokinginashearerwonderland said:

Nah, the cogs were just stuck there for a moment Al 😂 

Fair does min

Was starting to think you'd been carrying on like our ex manager in your picture 😉

I’m going to glide past that weird arithmetical gymnastics display and track back to the VAR debate. I’ve always thought VAR being introduced was driven by the big money investments in footballing outcomes. The more millions invested in performances, results and outcomes the more unwilling they are to tolerate ‘interpretation’ and ‘uncertainty’ as these all translate into risk and impact their returns. The demand for risk mitigation and increasingly certain outcomes comes with larger financial investment. Another example of financials dictating the game.  

30 minutes ago, Ajja said:

I’m going to glide past that weird arithmetical gymnastics display and track back to the VAR debate. I’ve always thought VAR being introduced was driven by the big money investments in footballing outcomes. The more millions invested in performances, results and outcomes the more unwilling they are to tolerate ‘interpretation’ and ‘uncertainty’ as these all translate into risk and impact their returns. The demand for risk mitigation and increasingly certain outcomes comes with larger financial investment. Another example of financials dictating the game.  

Exactly that. It was even mentioned in terms of finances when it was being discussed. EPL Team X could miss out on billions because of a decision in January that meant they didn't make the champions wank. 

That said, if it meant Hearts miss out on a sizeable CL or Europa League windfall then I could be persuaded. 😜

18 hours ago, Ajja said:

That said, if it meant Hearts miss out on a sizeable CL or Europa League windfall then I could be persuaded. 😜

Appears they are unseeded in the CL second qualifying round and will face one of the following

- Bodo/ Glimt

- Fenerbache

- Greek runners up

If they get knocked out they drop to the Europa league 3rd qualifying round. Fail there and its the Conference league play off round.

Bodo ragdolling them would be fun. Is that legit intel? How do you know so early on?

Edited May 16May 16 by Ajja