|
Post by londonranger on Jul 26, 2020 17:17:42 GMT
Coming down to meet us next season.
|
|
|
Post by surreychad on Jul 26, 2020 18:00:45 GMT
Cant stand Watford but its been a while since I went there so it good to have another team I can get to for the away game. Looking forward to Bournemouth away, if anyone needs a parking space for the game close my Boscombe office is walking distance.
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Jul 26, 2020 21:39:46 GMT
Actually Bournemouth won today but went down because Villa didn't lose. I like Bournemouth in our league. Family used to go to Bournemouth for holidays. The English Riviera.
|
|
|
Post by Ashdown_Ranger on Jul 28, 2020 15:10:23 GMT
Got to feel for Bournemouth. Would be interesting to see whether they go ahead with legal action - my guess is that they won't. A club couldn't sue a referee in the same circumstances, but maybe the supposed technical infallibility of the Hawkeye system leaves it open? I suppose the answer lies in the small print... OK, completely different scenario, but there is some kind of legal precedent in that Sheffield United took action against West Ham some years back, because they fielded an ineligible player (Carlos Tevez). They agreed £20m compensation (nowhere near enough), but their manager quit in disgust - can't quite recall who that was...
|
|
|
Post by Marc on Jul 28, 2020 15:36:48 GMT
Bournemouth are considering legal action for compensation against Hawkeye. In the first game after the restart Sheff Utd scored a clear goal at Villa but Hawkeye did not pick up the goal and VAR did not step in to review what would certainly have been awarded as a goal. If the Sheff Utd goal had counted (as it should have done) Villa would have been relegated on Sunday by one goal and Bournemouth would still be in the PL. I recall that at the time I said to a friend that the goalie mistake could end up deciding relegation places and lead to likely big claims. So it has proved. I understand it is the first time Hawkeye has got in wrong in 9,000 games and there were technical reasons why. Why VAR was not used is a different question when everyone on the pitch including the ref knew it was goal but his watch did not beep and the officials never the less ignored it . Not to worry it will only cost Bournemouth a 200 million or so over the next couple of years You see, I never buy that. The game would've restarted from the centre of the pitch and the rest of the game would've played out differently. There's no way to be certain that Villa wouldn't have gone on to score. I said similar regarding Lampard's disallowed goal against Germany. People said it didn't matter because we'd have lost 4-2 instead of 4-1 but we were 2-1 down at the time and, at 2-2, things could've been very different.
|
|
|
Post by nomar on Jul 28, 2020 15:53:27 GMT
Bournemouth are considering legal action for compensation against Hawkeye. In the first game after the restart Sheff Utd scored a clear goal at Villa but Hawkeye did not pick up the goal and VAR did not step in to review what would certainly have been awarded as a goal. If the Sheff Utd goal had counted (as it should have done) Villa would have been relegated on Sunday by one goal and Bournemouth would still be in the PL. I recall that at the time I said to a friend that the goalie mistake could end up deciding relegation places and lead to likely big claims. So it has proved. I understand it is the first time Hawkeye has got in wrong in 9,000 games and there were technical reasons why. Why VAR was not used is a different question when everyone on the pitch including the ref knew it was goal but his watch did not beep and the officials never the less ignored it . Not to worry it will only cost Bournemouth a 200 million or so over the next couple of years You see, I never buy that. The game would've restarted from the centre of the pitch and the rest of the game would've played out differently. There's no way to be certain that Villa wouldn't have gone on to score. I said similar regarding Lampard's disallowed goal against Germany. People said it didn't matter because we'd have lost 4-2 instead of 4-1 but we were 2-1 down at the time and, at 2-2, things could've been very different. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this way. Changing one event completely changes everything else that happens after it. The Butterfly effect, I believe they call it.
|
|
|
Post by Marc on Jul 28, 2020 15:57:54 GMT
You see, I never buy that. The game would've restarted from the centre of the pitch and the rest of the game would've played out differently. There's no way to be certain that Villa wouldn't have gone on to score. I said similar regarding Lampard's disallowed goal against Germany. People said it didn't matter because we'd have lost 4-2 instead of 4-1 but we were 2-1 down at the time and, at 2-2, things could've been very different. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this way. Changing one event completely changes everything else that happens after it. The Butterfly effect, I believe they call it. Exactly. It's the same as saying that we'd have won a game that ended 0-0 if we were given what we thought was a nailed on penalty. Bournemouth need to move on and concentrate on getting back into the Premier League IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by nomar on Jul 28, 2020 15:59:22 GMT
Actually Bournemouth won today but went down because Villa didn't lose. I like Bournemouth in our league. Family used to go to Bournemouth for holidays. The English Riviera. Yes I like Bournemouth as well and for many reasons I think they deserved to stay up and Villa deserved to go down. What happened happened and there is no going back but the thing that got under my skin was the attitude of West Ham that allowed Villa the point they needed so easily. If we had displayed the same effort and attitude at WBA as West Ham did yesterday we would have come away with a 5 or 6 goal thrashing and the teams now in the play-offs would have rightly pointed a finger at us. There is no telling what would have happened if West Ham had taken the game seriously or if the result would have been different, but at least they should have upheld the integrity of the competition and played football. They owed to that the teams around them. Their energy and performance was less than 50% of what I had seen in their previous games when they needed points be sure to stay up. Anyway time to move on, new season starting soon and hopefully both Villa and West Ham will join the play-off winners and be relegated at the end of it. PS Eze - do not go to WH. I didn't want Bournemouth to go down. But, they had 38 games to get enough points to stay up. If you leave things out of your control on the last day of the season you kind of get what you deserve. Relying on other teams who are physically spent, safe and just want to get the season over with is asking for trouble.
|
|
|
Post by nomar on Jul 30, 2020 6:46:26 GMT
Exactly. It's the same as saying that we'd have won a game that ended 0-0 if we were given what we thought was a nailed on penalty. Bournemouth need to move on and concentrate on getting back into the Premier League IMHO. My fault for not explaining my point correctly. Of course a million other things could have happened during that game or season which would have meant the ghost goal error was irrelevant. My point is that the game has "moved on" with multi million pound technology to get decisions right and it works most of the time. But the occasions when it goes wrong often seem to be the most important which impact results of games and can costs clubs such as Bournemouth vast amounts of money as a result. Lets assume IF the ghost goal had been scored by West Ham with the last kick of the against Villa and had not been given due to the failure of Hawkeye or the officials to use VAR would people still argue the the error was irrelevant to Bournemouth - who would have incorrectly been relegated. Nothing to do with Bournemouth relying on physically spent other teams etc - pure technological failure with dire consequences for one club who may consider appealing or taking action to safeguard themselves. If that was the last kick of the game then yes, you’d have a point. But, that result now affects what happens next for the rest of the teams in trouble at the bottom. Does that defeat kick start Villa to go and win the next game? Does a team like West Ham get complacent and lose their next few matches instead of ratcheting up the intensity like they did? How about Bournemouth and Watford? It’s a typical thought that if that one thing changed everything else that happened afterwards still stayed exactly the same. We’ll never know for sure, but everything else after that could have panned out completely differently. As for the technology aspect, no system is perfect so glitches are going to happen and wrong decisions will still happen.
|
|
|
Post by Marc on Jul 30, 2020 7:21:08 GMT
My fault for not explaining my point correctly. Of course a million other things could have happened during that game or season which would have meant the ghost goal error was irrelevant. My point is that the game has "moved on" with multi million pound technology to get decisions right and it works most of the time. But the occasions when it goes wrong often seem to be the most important which impact results of games and can costs clubs such as Bournemouth vast amounts of money as a result. Lets assume IF the ghost goal had been scored by West Ham with the last kick of the against Villa and had not been given due to the failure of Hawkeye or the officials to use VAR would people still argue the the error was irrelevant to Bournemouth - who would have incorrectly been relegated. Nothing to do with Bournemouth relying on physically spent other teams etc - pure technological failure with dire consequences for one club who may consider appealing or taking action to safeguard themselves. If that was the last kick of the game then yes, you’d have a point. But, that result now affects what happens next for the rest of the teams in trouble at the bottom. Does that defeat kick start Villa to go and win the next game? Does a team like West Ham get complacent and lose their next few matches instead of ratcheting up the intensity like they did? How about Bournemouth and Watford? It’s a typical thought that if that one thing changed everything else that happened afterwards still stayed exactly the same. We’ll never know for sure, but everything else after that could have panned out completely differently. As for the technology aspect, no system is perfect so glitches are going to happen and wrong decisions will still happen. Exactly. If Bournemouth were to be successful in any legal action, it would set a very dangerous precedent.
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Jul 30, 2020 8:28:59 GMT
Agree. Think the stand point has to be that electronic or not, being correct at footballing decisions 100% of the time is an aspiration rather than a guarantee. Doesn't make Hawkeye screwing up fair or acceptable, doesn't mean Bournemouth weren't hard done by in that instance. But it's about mitigating mistakes as much as possible rather than a system promising they won't ever happen. The permutations are just too big for any kind of footballing appeal to be worth while.
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Jul 30, 2020 14:09:57 GMT
So moving away from Bournemouth Aston Villa West Ham and the rest. Watford owners have to be to blame for their relegation. They had three managers in one season. Highly unusual for the Prem but it could be the reason Watford succumbed. My good Watford friend said that final move with Watford having two tough games to play was the kiss of death.
|
|
|
Post by nomar on Jul 30, 2020 18:19:55 GMT
Bournemouth will be getting £41M for Nathan Ake, they’ll be fine this coming season.
|
|