Nastiness and abuse is creeping in here, It happened during the Bas era, when posters were divided between those who had rumbled him and those who hadn't, and as a result I stopped coming on this site for a while. Since the Pozzos turned out to be quite good at what they do, it's been largely sweetness and light, but all of a sudden it isn't. I'm not sure why. Nobody believes that this season has been a failure. Some of us think that with the players we have in the squad, we could be doing a bit better, but I don't see why we should fall out over that. Why can't we all be nice to each other? Listen to me and learn, you bastards.
Replace Anya with Guediora, but that said he brought his Scotland form to Stoke rather than his Watford form.
I know this is probably a little bit technical, but if you clicked on the link the image will suddenly increase in size.
I think we can all sleep more soundly knowing that HB1 spends hours on photoshop doctoring pictures in an attempt to win a messageboard debate.
Most of us can place a viewable image in the post itself. (See countless others in this thread). It isn't hard.
Yes, and there's a ruddy great gap between the foot of the player and the ball so the pass hasn't been made.
I'm very keen on debate, which is why I post a lot on here, but I'm less keen on personal abuse you ******.
I think what most of you have missed, is the stray gorilla either playing Giroud onside, or perhaps obscuring the linos view. Very Very Lucky to get away with a result here.
Most people have the wit and intelligence to click on a link without being told this is what they have to do, present company excepted of course. :]]
To be fair,HB1 has a point. On another day,the ref would have thought Gueds goal hit the side netting and it'd have been disallowed.
How many milliseconds are these frames apart? He's still onside by frame 7 and only in frame 8 and 9 is he level. Normally when it's like that the advantage is given to the attacking side. But you'll have us believe he was "blatantly" offside........well you've just proved that is not the case.......so thanks for that. You should just say you got it wrong.....and move on.
He's onside up till frame 5 however the ball doesn't get played till frame 9/10 so about a fifth of a second Long enough.
It's less than a 5th of a second. TV is shot at 24fps, so that's 9 frames which is about third of a second in its entirety. So that would be 2 frames from 24, so that's a 12th of a second you are looking at here. I'm even more convinced we got lucky with the decision now. It happened way too fast for a human to have spotted this accurately in normal speed. I think he saw the player at the top of the screen and flagged on that very early. We got the breaks on the day and that is now beyond any dispute. You've had to slow it down to 1/12th of a second to actually see it. Even in the final frame his standing leg is onside, and only his raised leg and bent knee makes him look offside. His head is level also.
He's off for at least four frames and even in the last the ball hasn't yet released. In frame 9 his whole torso and head are well offside, not just his knee. If I can spot it at normal speed then so can the lino.
Definitions skewed. Blatantly offside means "having seen the slow mo replay, it's clearly a correct call" not "he was miles offside mate" Do linesmen get these wrong? Of course. Was it unlucky for Arsenal and lucky for Watford? No If given onside would it have been lucky for Arsenal and unlucky for Watford? Yes. Now you're arguing over the definition of broadcast fps timings when actually nobody has detailed the frame rate of the recording used. If it's taken off YouTube or Internet etc it'll be different to BT sports original broadcast. But both sides using to prove a fact. Definitions and interpretation skewed.
Of course it's not. An offside that is "blatant" means you do NOT need to see a slow motion replay of the incident, as it was obvious to everyone in real time. I'm amazed why so many people want to twist things just to win a point. Bizarre behaviour.
Look in the mirror mate. It was blatantly the correct call from the ref. It was close but that's not what you started the argument about.
Whether it is blatant offside or not, is immaterial. You raised the goal in the first place as a small part of your general argument about how Watford are playing, saying it was a goal having "seen it many times". You are wrong. In fact you are so blatantly wrong that, trying to wriggle out of it, means that everything else you say has no credibility. As I said 100's of posts ago, you should have just admitted you were wrong with the offside and concentrated on the bigger picture, which many of us have some sympathy. Having said that, I have found your wriggling and squirming quite amusing!
HB1 is a agent of Quique, by transforming a discussion about how poor we were in a 2-1 defeat to Stoke, to a decision that (very rightfully so), went in our favour in the previous match, we'be all forgotten what the original frustration was. 9/10 trolling sir.
