Patrick Bamford

[Scoobychief]

congratulation Paddy on your 100th goal

[Smudge3920]

Recently Paddy talked about MB's heavy expectations about running ...He wasn't kidding he has made more ball pressures than any striker in the prem...
.

[Irish Ian]

100th goal earns him in a piece in the Guardian.

Probably not his type of paper.



https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... eds-united

[DavidH]

I watched the interview shortly after the end of the game (5 to 10mins I think it was) , and what struck me, was he was still catching his breath. It shows how much running a Bielsa team player has to do.

[Cjay]

[Smudge3920]

I am so choked about this decision I cannot write about it yet ...
.

[BobHirst]

I am so choked about this decision I cannot write about it yet ...
.

The offside call via VAR is way biased in favor of the defender.
The defender is generally looking towards the ball with his hands, arms, knees, toes, head and body generally in front of him pointing away from the goal. In the case of the attacker, his hands, arms, knees, toes, head and body are generally in front of him pointing towards the goal. I think this gives the defender a big advantage over the attacker.
Since we are being so precise with the offside call I think we need a rule change.
Proposal 1. If there is 100% daylight between any part of the defender and any part of the attacker then the attacker is offside.
Proposal 2. Just compare the position of the feet in relation to the goal. If any part of the defenders foot is nearer to the goal then the attacker is not offside.
Surely a lot easier to rule on than what we currently have.

[Smudge3920]

Bob it is even worse than that for me ... we need a machine to determine if he is offside it is MM's...so how the hell can the linesman see it from the otherside of the park and raise his flag?... IMO the linesmen now are being precautionary and wanting to preserve their image... they know VAR will come to their aid...if they call it offside oh what a ferkin linesman he is ... it is now gone from the absurd to the ridiculous

[1964white]

Well said Paddy

Lets hope his comment doesn't get him in trouble with the PL/FA officials.

[White Riot]

I am so choked about this decision I cannot write about it yet ...
.

Dead right mate, I'm fooking fuming, just as I was at Palace when we were fooking robbed there

Bamford, and us, have lost two goals and potentially six points because of this VAR fooking shite.

He's justified in his reaction, I hope these FA cnuts don't penalize him, as the lad is having a great season and scored two brilliant goals that have been unfairly chalked off.

As I said in another post, this is a different matter when we're sitting pretty, but imagine if we were in a relegation dogfight and those two decisions cost us our PL place after all these years fighting to get back up?

Fook the FA, refs, linespersons and especially these fooking VAR cnuts

These w**kers wouldn't be so brave if they had a packed Elland Road screaming at them

[White Riot]

Well said Paddy

Lets hope his comment doesn't get him in trouble with the PL/FA officials.

If Paddy is penalized for this, Bielsa and the players should not turn up for any interviews pre and post match for the rest of the season. It's generally just a bunch of half-wits asking them stupid questions anyway and trying to provoke and antagonize Bielsa.

If we're contractually obliged to do these interviews then just turn up and say "No comment" to every question.

The FA, PL, VAR, EFL, etc are making a mockery of the beautiful game, so they can all go and fook themselves

[White Riot]

The offside call via VAR is way biased in favor of the defender.
The defender is generally looking towards the ball with his hands, arms, knees, toes, head and body generally in front of him pointing away from the goal. In the case of the attacker, his hands, arms, knees, toes, head and body are generally in front of him pointing towards the goal. I think this gives the defender a big advantage over the attacker.
Since we are being so precise with the offside call I think we need a rule change.
Proposal 1. If there is 100% daylight between any part of the defender and any part of the attacker then the attacker is offside.
Proposal 2. Just compare the position of the feet in relation to the goal. If any part of the defenders foot is nearer to the goal then the attacker is not offside.
Surely a lot easier to rule on than what we currently have.

Correct Bob, if they're deciding this by a gnat's chuff then we need to have absolute clarity and your suggestions are very good.

I'm absolutely fuming about these decisions that have cost Paddy and us big style.

[CHAPELALLMAN]

The offside call via VAR is way biased in favor of the defender.
The defender is generally looking towards the ball with his hands, arms, knees, toes, head and body generally in front of him pointing away from the goal. In the case of the attacker, his hands, arms, knees, toes, head and body are generally in front of him pointing towards the goal. I think this gives the defender a big advantage over the attacker.
Since we are being so precise with the offside call I think we need a rule change.
Proposal 1. If there is 100% daylight between any part of the defender and any part of the attacker then the attacker is offside.
Proposal 2. Surely a lot easier to rule on than what we currently have.

And also not offside if the feet of defender and attacker are level. It should all be based on the position of the feet and no other part of the body - I can't believe that officials are judging based on knees, elbows, noses or even a finger pointing at where the forward wants the ball...

[Byebyegeegee]

And also not offside if the feet of defender and attacker are level. It should all be based on the position of the feet and no other part of the body - I can't believe that officials are judging based on knees, elbows, noses or even a finger pointing at where the forward wants the ball...

This!

Absolutely, if we are going by millimetres and it seems that with VAR we are, then it should only be the feet that are taken into consideration. Brilliant suggestion Bob and Chapel

[CHAPELALLMAN]

This!

Absolutely, if we are going by millimetres and it seems that with VAR we are, then it should only be the feet that are taken into consideration. Brilliant suggestion Bob and Chapel

[Lumiukko]

Agree, since VAR are being so macro about this, then only feet should be taken into consideration as that truly is the starting position of the players.

Part of me likes the idea of an "umpires call" where if the lino doesn't flag, then if it is too close to judge on VAR it is given as whatever the lino said. Unfortunately, I reckon linesmen will just flag every time to let VAR take the flak. And in Bamford's case still would have been offside.

[John in Louisiana]

And also not offside if the feet of defender and attacker are level. It should all be based on the position of the feet and no other part of the body - I can't believe that officials are judging based on knees, elbows, noses or even a finger pointing at where the forward wants the ball...

Exactly.

[1964white]

[1964white]

What a breath of fresh air Paddy is an educated footballer too!

[Smudge3920]

Agree, since VAR are being so macro about this, then only feet should be taken into consideration as that truly is the starting position of the players.

Part of me likes the idea of an "umpires call" where if the lino doesn't flag, then if it is too close to judge on VAR it is given as whatever the lino said. Unfortunately, I reckon linesmen will just flag every time to let VAR take the flak. And in Bamford's case still would have been offside.

IMO that is what is happening already...linesmen flagging " just in case" as then the responsibility is taken from them.