Longest Thread! for Everton Discussion

[Aidan]

Need to replace Baines with someone as soon as. 

[Shukes]

12 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

great great news here.  players out of contract this summer:  Niasse, Baines, Martina, Stek, Sidibe (option to buy).  Niasse Stek and Martina are 3 lumps we can finally remove from the payroll.  dead wood clearing itself.

Though we were much higher in the league with those on the pitch

No I agree really haha we need to move them on and replace with players that can improve us.

I would keep Baines though.

[Romey 1878]

 

Don't know about anyone else, but this was needed after a tough few days of being a blue.

[duncanmckenzieismagic]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/11/08/premier-league-admit-var-decision-award-brighton-penalty-against/

[Romey 1878]

8 hours ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/11/08/premier-league-admit-var-decision-award-brighton-penalty-against/

Well that's alright then!

[Wiggytop]

9 hours ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/11/08/premier-league-admit-var-decision-award-brighton-penalty-against/

FFS why have they said this now, it just pisses me off even more, at 2-1 we were in control and on our way to three points.

Next week they will no doubt come out and say we should have been given the two penalty shouts against Spurs also.

[MikeO]

Got my "Howard's Way" DVD this morning, not supposed to be released until tomorrow. Promise I won't post any spoilers

[Palfy]

4 hours ago, MikeO said:

Got my "Howard's Way" DVD this morning, not supposed to be released until tomorrow. Promise I won't post any spoilers

[MikeO]

5 hours ago, MikeO said:

Got my "Howard's Way" DVD this morning, not supposed to be released until tomorrow. Promise I won't post any spoilers

Great film very well done and even delves into the politics of the day. Had me in tears and laughing out loud at times and also extremely grateful that I was there on a few occasions; I'll be watching it many times.

[Palfy]

7 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Great film very well done and even delves into the politics of the day. Had me in tears and laughing out loud at times and also extremely grateful that I was there on a few occasions; I'll be watching it many times.

I ordered mine weeks ago from Amazon, not arrived yet. 

[MikeO]

19 minutes ago, Palfy said:

I ordered mine weeks ago from Amazon, not arrived yet. 

Should be tomorrow, was surprised mine arrived today.

[Palfy]

1 minute ago, MikeO said:

Should be tomorrow, was surprised mine arrived today.

[Palfy]

On 10/11/2019 at 17:56, MikeO said:

Should be tomorrow, was surprised mine arrived today.

Mine arrived today Mike, obviously you live in a more desirable Post Code than me. 

[Palfy]

On 10/11/2019 at 17:26, MikeO said:

Great film very well done and even delves into the politics of the day. Had me in tears and laughing out loud at times and also extremely grateful that I was there on a few occasions; I'll be watching it many times.

Watched it last night it brought all the emotions back of that era like it was yesterday, watching it again Saturday with some of the grand kids, that was the first I’d really heard from Van den Hauwe in decades, he’s still scary the original psycho loved a tear up and looks like he’s ready to go again. 

[Aidan]

 

Probably because we get shafted every week with it

[Palfy]

Who would have thought that VAR would contribute to just as many bad decisions as when it was just the ref and lino’s. 
At least you could sing the referees a wanker when he fucked up, it doesn’t sound the same singing the VARs a wanker. 
Let’s get back to what we’ve known for years VAR is ruining the game as a spectacle in my opinion, and killing the atmosphere when a goal is scored you cant completely celebrate to it in case it’s disallowed 2-3 minutes later. 

[Finn balor]

Yeah it’s shite. Get rid 

[Bailey]

6 hours ago, Palfy said:

Who would have thought that VAR would contribute to just as many bad decisions as when it was just the ref and lino’s. 
At least you could sing the referees a wanker when he fucked up, it doesn’t sound the same singing the VARs a wanker. 
Let’s get back to what we’ve known for years VAR is ruining the game as a spectacle in my opinion, and killing the atmosphere when a goal is scored you cant completely celebrate to it in case it’s disallowed 2-3 minutes later. 

This is why it made me laugh in the world cup when it was used. They said something like 99% of all decisions are correct and yet in almost every game there was a big decision that wasn't, or at the very least, it was very dubious.

The whole point of VAR is that is clears up the obvious but it doesn't. I even think the offside calls are dubious when the offside player is millimeters "offside" and its not absolutely clear when the ball leaves the foot.

A 2-3 minute delay to get a wrong decision is shocking.

[Cornish Steve]

On 08/11/2019 at 19:24, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/11/08/premier-league-admit-var-decision-award-brighton-penalty-against/

I’d love to see Everton file a lawsuit against the FA for financial damages, since three points could cost us millions because of a lower final league position. A lawsuit would force the FA to get serious in a hurry. Right now, VAR can seriously be used to rig results. 

[barryj]

I think I’m now in the minority in that I still want VAR but it has to be massively improved. I believe if it’s abolished now it’s not likely to be reintroduced in a generation or two. The concept is completely right but the execution is so poor. What people forget is that decisions on the whole that VAR have got wrong would still of been wrong with the ref (as they hadn’t overruled) so therefore we have parity. What I’d like to see with offside would be clear offside and what I mean by that is daylight between the players to overrule (as the attacker should be given any element of doubt). For example in cricket it goes to ‘umpires call’ if the ball is partially hitting the stumps. It could therefore be linesman’s call unless there is a clear error (daylight between the players). The problem with most other decisions is that it’s open to interpretation. For example the sky survey on whether City should have had a penalty against Liverpool was around 53% 47% it should have been given. I was convinced it was  a penalty but that shows others thought differently. I just want the ref to go to the monitor and to explain decisions better and inform me at the ground what’s going on. 
 

I think it’s time we had a separate VAR thread.

[Shukes]

I agree mostly Barryj, other than parity.

Lots of these decisions have been made after the fact. The Brighton penalty being a great example. If it wasn’t for VAR, the referee didn’t stop the game, he played on not thinking anything as wrong.

There have been goals that have been disallowed after the referee has had the ball on the centre circle. This is where it’s major flaw is. It should be being used for when the referee questions an incident. 

At the moment it’s being used to check every decision.

[MikeO]

1 hour ago, Shukes said:

I agree mostly Barryj, other than parity.

Lots of these decisions have been made after the fact. The Brighton penalty being a great example. If it wasn’t for VAR, the referee didn’t stop the game, he played on not thinking anything as wrong.

There have been goals that have been disallowed after the referee has had the ball on the centre circle. This is where it’s major flaw is. It should be being used for when the referee questions an incident. 

At the moment it’s being used to check every decision.

Absolutely. In rugby it's only ever used when the ref asks for something to be checked, should be the same.

[Sibdane]

10 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Absolutely. In rugby it's only ever used when the ref asks for something to be checked, should be the same.

In the NFL coaches have what are called "challenges." They can challenge a call on a play and the ref will review, and if they're right then obviously the call/play is overturned; if they're wrong then they lose a timeout. I don't know how that would work in the PL, but it let's the coach have some input at least and holds the ref accountable. I think video review is used correctly in the NFL, but it just feels so wrong in the PL.

[MikeO]

10 minutes ago, Sibdane said:

In the NFL coaches have what are called "challenges." They can challenge a call on a play and the ref will review, and if they're right then obviously the call/play is overturned; if they're wrong then they lose a timeout. I don't know how that would work in the PL, but it let's the coach have some input at least and holds the ref accountable. I think video review is used correctly in the NFL, but it just feels so wrong in the PL.

Same as tennis/cricket; the difficulty with that system  in football is, I think, that certainly in tennis and cricket the replay results are 100% definitive, there's no grey area. In rugby the ref may ask things like whether there's an obvious reason not to award a score like a forward pass or an off ball obstruction that hampered the defence or even whether the ball has actually been touched down (strange as it may seem to you Yanks, in rugby the ball has to be touched down for it to be a touch down, how daft is that?); that's the model I'd like used in football.

[barryj]

9 hours ago, Shukes said:

I agree mostly Barryj, other than parity.

Lots of these decisions have been made after the fact. The Brighton penalty being a great example. If it wasn’t for VAR, the referee didn’t stop the game, he played on not thinking anything as wrong.

There have been goals that have been disallowed after the referee has had the ball on the centre circle. This is where it’s major flaw is. It should be being used for when the referee questions an incident. 

At the moment it’s being used to check every decision.

There were none overturned prior to the last international break and people complained (& rightly as there were in my opinion some clear penalties not given). What happened then is the VAR committee met and agreed more should have been overturned. Following this I think they were looking to make a statement and overturn a decision and as per usual Everton were on the wrong side with that ridiculous penalty at Brighton. The technology works it’s just the way they’re implementing it that doesn’t. 

[Palfy]

15 hours ago, Shukes said:

I agree mostly Barryj, other than parity.

Lots of these decisions have been made after the fact. The Brighton penalty being a great example. If it wasn’t for VAR, the referee didn’t stop the game, he played on not thinking anything as wrong.

There have been goals that have been disallowed after the referee has had the ball on the centre circle. This is where it’s major flaw is. It should be being used for when the referee questions an incident. 

At the moment it’s being used to check every decision.

So what you are saying is no situation should be looked at unless the ref requests it, which is a great idea, but I really don’t think that he wouldn’t be influenced to look at incidents that he may not have requested help with. 
I personally think that the ref watching the VAR will be advising and prompting the ref on the field through his ear piece when ever he thinks something has been missed, basically leaving us in the same position as we are now. 
Bad decisions will not be accepted if the ref got it wrong and never asked for assistance, and if they got it wrong and assistance wasn’t offered. 
I personally think we should get rid of it, it is evident that it has to many flaws, and human errors will always come into play whether using VAR or just the the 3 officials, so for flow of the game and stopping the long pauses whilst we wait for decisions that are as wrong as they are right, I would rather we went back to just the match officials making honest decisions there and then, after all I think it hasn’t worked to badly for the last 140 years or so. 

[Matt]

On 15/11/2019 at 01:22, barryj said:

I think it’s time we had a separate VAR thread.

I'd move the existing comments but don't want to risk losing any. Anyway, enjoy!

[Shukes]

2 hours ago, Palfy said:

So what you are saying is no situation should be looked at unless the ref requests it, which is a great idea, but I really don’t think that he wouldn’t be influenced to look at incidents that he may not have requested help with. 
I personally think that the ref watching the VAR will be advising and prompting the ref on the field through his ear piece when ever he thinks something has been missed, basically leaving us in the same position as we are now. 
Bad decisions will not be accepted if the ref got it wrong and never asked for assistance, and if they got it wrong and assistance wasn’t offered. 
I personally think we should get rid of it, it is evident that it has to many flaws, and human errors will always come into play whether using VAR or just the the 3 officials, so for flow of the game and stopping the long pauses whilst we wait for decisions that are as wrong as they are right, I would rather we went back to just the match officials making honest decisions there and then, after all I think it hasn’t worked to badly for the last 140 years or so. 

I don’t think we should get rid of it as it is a step forward. 

Lets put this into some logic. VAR isn’t the issue here. There is nothing wrong with the tech, it’s the people using it.

I do want the referee to keep making decisions and o let use it when needed.... like other sports. It shouldn’t be used for every incident. It shouldn’t be used so some ego can say they discovered that a forward was 0.1 mm offside. It shouldn’t used to show that a player was offside in the first phase when a goal was scored in the third.

It should be used when the referee thinks he saw an issue but wants to check. 

It should be used for wrongful dismissals.

The people making the decisions from watching VAR are where the issue is.

[barryj]

3 hours ago, Palfy said:

So what you are saying is no situation should be looked at unless the ref requests it, which is a great idea, but I really don’t think that he wouldn’t be influenced to look at incidents that he may not have requested help with. 
I personally think that the ref watching the VAR will be advising and prompting the ref on the field through his ear piece when ever he thinks something has been missed, basically leaving us in the same position as we are now. 
Bad decisions will not be accepted if the ref got it wrong and never asked for assistance, and if they got it wrong and assistance wasn’t offered. 
I personally think we should get rid of it, it is evident that it has to many flaws, and human errors will always come into play whether using VAR or just the the 3 officials, so for flow of the game and stopping the long pauses whilst we wait for decisions that are as wrong as they are right, I would rather we went back to just the match officials making honest decisions there and then, after all I think it hasn’t worked to badly for the last 140 years or so. 

I don’t agree - we have the technology to overturn blatant wrong decisions so we should use it. Take us at Milwall last year. We were awful but knocked out of the cup due to clear errors. At the time I couldn’t see us winning the thing but if you look at our end of season form we may well of had another piece of silverware recorded in our history books. Would you take back goal line technology? Everyone excepts that the ball was or wasn’t over the line even by mm’s and it is certainly better than we had before. I just want more right decisions being made and that they are consistent. 
 

.......& I can’t see the ref spending more time viewing the VAR monitor a game than I sit watching Richarlison get treatment for a phantom injury! 

[Romey 1878]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11671/11861871/everton-to-loan-more-youths-abroad-after-jonjoe-kenny-and-fraser-hornby-success