Jump to content
oneBoro Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


ScarBoro last won the day on November 10 2020

ScarBoro had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

118 Excellent

About ScarBoro

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It looks like going on trial and then signing for Bayern has only just happened - it’s dated yesterday, so maybe it was only over last month that he showed enough to interest Bayern. Even at under 18, I assume Burnley or us could only have signed him during the transfer window? In other words over a month ago. So maybe the article wasn’t totally off the mark.
  2. Is it though? paddy was coming from the goal line straight out. This means he wasn’t going straight into their player, even though that’s what the photo makes you think. With the direction he’s going in, he either slides past their player, or if their player moves his leg forward, then he hits it - which is probably what happened. But is that Paddy’s fault? You can’t go for the ball thinking about where the opposition player MIGHT move to. Also his right foot is angled down. Yes studs are showing, but his foot is almost on top of his left leg, it couldn’t get much lower. it may be a red card technically, but he’s terribly unlucky if it is.
  3. Looks clear as a rule doesn’t it? However, what happens when the ball is loose and the player “lunges” at the ball and the opponent moves across to try to recover it? The tackler hasn’t lunged at the opponent, but ends up getting opponent as well. seems to me that’s what happened last night. Ball had been knocked sideways by opponent and McNair saw it clearly and did lunge in a bit to get it. Opponent tried to recover at same time and ended up where McNair was sliding in. I think it is one of those that could go either way. Depends maybe what ref puts in report. If he didn’t really see it and relied on assistant then assistant was a poor angle and distant to see intent and whether the lunge was at the player. If ref did see it, then why didn’t he send him straight off or issue a yellow card. He obviously wasn’t sure himself, which must help in any appeal.
  4. It just can’t be anywhere near as bad as the old Baseball Ground was in the 1970s and 80s. Not a blade of grass in sight by this time in season
  5. So does VAR have to decide whether its 17inches or 19 inches offside then? Its like I said in an earlier post. If you are going to use VAR for offside, the only way for it to work without getting into long delays, and armpits or toes being fractionally offside is to limit its use by the VAR official. A quick review of the still shot to decide whether the assistant ref is right or wrong would eliminate all the blatant wrong decisions and avoid ruining the game by stopping for 2 or 3 minutes and even then having a debate as to whether the ball left the passing players foot a fraction of a second earlier or later. IF VAR ref cant see immediately that it is offside then that should be that. This isn't refs fault - its FIFA/EUFA/Refs association and how they looked to implement VAR.
  6. Trouble is, that would still leave the endless delays whilst the VAR ref tried to work out whether 59% or 61% of the player was offside! The offside rule was conceived when current technology wasn’t dreamed of. There only three options to stop the current method ruining the game 1. abolish offside 2. abolish VAR. (at least for offside decisions) 3. modify the way it is used. The VAR ref should be shown the still of the offside and have to decide within 15 seconds whether it is offside or not. (without lines being drawn preferably). If he can’t decide, then the original decision stands. Sure, there will be some wrong decisions, but at least the game wouldn’t be stopped for 3 or 4 minutes whilst lines are drawn and the incident replayed repeatedly. I actually think that should be the default for all VAR decision. A limited time look and no change to the refs decision unless the VAR official thinks it is clearly wrong.
  7. Agree with everything you say, except for Fry. Its been noticeable when Fry is missing this season, we struggle. He's shown this season why Premier League clubs were sniffing around him before the disastrous move to left centre back last season. I reckon Warnock would love to keep him next season AND add a "big brute" centre half along side him. Of course money might talk and the need for reinforcements elsewhere, or to pay wages if some of our loanees become permanent signings, might force a sale. Equally Fry wasn't to keen to move before was he? In the end, its largely up to him.
  8. I’d say it would be nice for them to win the next couple of games and appoint him full time! The worst of all worlds though is for them to win the next couple under him and then appoint someone who is actually capable of keeping them winning, so I’d rather Karanka does himself and us a favor by beating them.
  9. Reckon injuries - particularly in defence - will be the key. If we don't lose players like Fry , McNair etc. then we will be really difficult to beat. That gives us a springboard to launch from and we now at least have a lot more options and hopefully more quality further forward. The schedule isn't as bad either in terms of number of midweek games, so fatigue shouldn't be as much of an issue for the ever-presents. If we do avoid injuries in critical position, I reckon we will scrape into the play offs. There's always a team that implodes and one that comes from nowhere.
  10. Well, Pulis is free at the moment - and it would be handy for him to commute!
  11. It’s fairly obvious that the £42m accumulated in their bank and their reluctance to splash out in the transfer market are directly linked with the sale that has just happened. The owners were obviously building up cash to maximize the value of the club. If they continue the same policy of not spending much, the £60m rumored to be borrowed by the club to finance the deal can be paid back over a few years. It’s exactly what the Glazers have done, but at a much smaller scale club. As long as they stay in Premier League, they’ll be ok - and as long as they keep Dyche, they will probably stay in Premier League, though it pains me to admit it. Relegation could make it a completely different game though. They would certainly have to bounce straight back or it would be a big problem. Just think of the impact on Boro, if Gibson was charging 9% interest on the money he has put in!
  12. Not just the wages either. Think about Marcus Browne. It’s ok holding out until end of your contract, but all it takes is one serious injury and if you have run your contract down you have no income for months, or potentially longer, and a much less marketable offer as no one will sign you without seeing whether you can get fully back to full match fitness. It’s not as though Brett has never experienced that either - I’m not suggestion he is injury prone, but he’s knows what it is like to be out for a long time. it’s a gamble at any time but in current climate seems like a bigger one. You would think his agent would be reminding him of that as well, as his cut of the action depends on getting a deal through. you can interpret “struggling” to agree wages and fee deal as miles apart and unlikely to agree, or as each side trying to hold out to get a little extra but always intending to get some deal settled. We’ve passed the initial threshold to allow the negotiations to get down to the detail and there’s always going to be wrangling. Brett won’t want to give up his current salary for next five months, Bristol won’t want to pay it and Boro won’t want to subsidize it. So I wouldn’t necessarily say it’s less likely that yesterday’s reports. It’s just the way transfers usually go, or don’t go if one side holds out too much and for too long.
  13. He said it was an abscess didn't he, and that he had stitches in. That sounds as though it is simply a question of a short time for the wound to heal and then he should be as good as new - plus he will have had a break which is a good thing this season.
  14. Doesn’t really add up though does it? Gibson puts in what ever money he wants to (up to FFP limits of course). Let’s say it’s £5m a year. If you find an external sponsor that adds another amount into clubs income, say £1m a year. So we get £6m in total. . If .Bulkhaul sponsors the club, it’s Gibsons money, so part of the £5m total that he’s willing to put in. Add to that the fact that he only owns 75[?]% of Bulkhaul, so would need to get partner to agree, plus league would likely crawl over Bulkhaul sponsorship as it is not a company selling to consumers, so the advertising would not really help its business.
  15. Did we let him go, or did he want to go? Went back to York, didn’t he, so maybe just not ready at that age to be away from home and friends.
  • Create New...