cambo97

Now with 3 from 12 we've still not won away from home on grass.

i don't disagree with your comments, I was commenting on the referee's rationale, he thought he went down too easily. I don't think he did and neither should have VAR but they did. We shouldn't be pulling up the referee on saying what he did.

I would say it's exactly what a referee should be thinking and communicating to VAR, he has to be sure and communicate, he might be wrong but he only has one very quick look. I'll bet there is not one person who has been 100% certain over a decision at the game only to see a replay later and realised how wrong they were. He's giving the reason for his decision, VAR ignored that by looking for arm contact.

without being cheeky (well I'm actually calling you a moron😉) wdy was a million times better. The worse part was it never started until the English schools finished and we got the usual cr** until then.

Offside is one of those decision that clear and obvious is irrelevant. It totally objective your either offside or your not, no maybes ayes, maybes naw.

I thought Coatbridge considered themselves part of Ireland

But the best paid sportsman is a footballer, and of the top 10 three player football and none play golf

If he flying to and from NZ, it's closer to 2 days each way not just a few hours and it's tiring.

It was Scott Howie in goals that day - wonder how many of his horrendous games have been blamed on Wood

Forget you posted this?

I remember the free air volley against Partick?, followed up by cracking two goals

Pretty sure that was overturned on appeal and was the first time UEFA had ever done it.

There is no benefit of the doubt in an offside decision, it's either offside or onside. The only time that changes is with the "interfering with play" part. It would still be a toenail, just from a different reference point.

I think that's unfair, they are instructed to not call tight (or even obvious) decisions and let VAR decide later, which is fair enough as many tight decision given have would been awarded by the original decision then would have been declared offside.

That's the first time I've seen the Balmer RC but the explanation is ridiculous, he says the Kilmarnock player comes in from the side, the Motherwell player clearly is not making a challenge but because his foot comes off the ground and hit above the knee it's a red card, that's mental using that explanation there would be two or three red cards every game. . I also seem to remember a Celtic challenge which hit the chest but was classed as a yellow as it didn't hit the face. Why wasn't the next one a red card to the Kilmarnock player it was well above the knee and there was brutality, it was worse than the Balmer one.