I've still not seen any Tories propose any policies to win over anyone under the age of 60. I will wait.
Isn’t that a bit of a silly question? If they offered a free house for everyone under 50, or £500k for anyone who already had one, I think they might win a few votes.
I know that’s a silly extreme example, but what do you want from people? Any party is capable of offering policies to attract any part of the electorate.
But for the Tories, the next time they win it will be based around personal freedoms, lower taxes, supporting home ownership, a sniff of patriotism, and an offer on crime.
Would that be an offer to stop committing so many of them?
I'm reassessing my Portillo moment- Gillian Keegan getting booted out in Chichester might be more entertaining than Liz Truss losing.
Nah, I still want to see Truss get ousted.
Rees Mogg is so loathed that his defeat will be greeted with shouts of joy.
I have a bottle of Chablis on stand-by (couldn't get a decent Sancerre)
2 lovely wines.
Indeed. For everyday use I usually stick to Pinot Grigio or a nice Chardonnay but for the demise of a piece of pond slime tory big beast like JRM, I thought that something extra special was needed
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
I have always thought Michael Oliver to be absolutely f*****' useless (two West Brom red cards against against Blackpool in 2010). This game has done nothing to change that view.
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket).
Benefit of the doubt to the attacker on offside as a parallel to benefit of the doubt to the batsman. A “ref’s call” corridor on the VAR screen mirroring umpire’s call. If it’s within that, you go with the initial decision.
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
15 seconds in cricket, isn't? That's enough time for someone watching on tv, to tell the coach to tell the players.
Also, it's a continuous game. So, you'd have situations where they'd have to check if the appeal was in time as it could be a review for anything.
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
15 seconds in cricket, isn't? That's enough time for someone watching on tv, to tell the coach to tell the players.
Easy solution, the coaches get the game feed at the moment live, you delay it 15 seconds. Actually, I don't even know if they get all the camera feeds live / with ability to slow mo / rock n' roll it.
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
15 seconds in cricket, isn't? That's enough time for someone watching on tv, to tell the coach to tell the players.
Easy solution, the coaches get the game feed at the moment live, you delay it 15 seconds.
And ban any comms to people watching on tv elsewhere?
Opinium were almost bang on in 2019 but have changed their methodology since.
I will stick with Labour on about 40%.
Sunak's strategy actually had some sense in it but he simply wasn't able to execute.
It was clearly to wrongfoot and cripple Reform, and then go for Labour on tax. And you can see that playing out in what CCHQ has done.
Almost could have worked. Had he got it right the Tories could have been up at 32-33% and Labour at 37-38% and a hung parliament.
In the end Rishi just wasn't up to it...
The thing that has shocked me the most is that the Tory fundraising has been absolutely terrible. They wouldn´t be withdrawing support from held seats, if they had enough money... but they do not. This despite the fact that Sunak must have been thinking about a snap poll for at least a little while. The fact is that the Tories seem to have been just as surprised as any other party by the early poll. Sunak squandered the one clear advantage that he had. If he had held the poll in the autumn, Farage would not even be standing, because he would be over with Trump and MAGAs for their election.
One of the things I find quite baffling about this General Election is just *why* the Tories were so surprised by the 4th July date. I'm no expert, but even I knew that there was an election coming within the next nine months - in order to meet that eventuality there need to be candidates in place (at the very least) and the local parties on standby. Those in the Party HQs no doubt have other more clever things to do (have a media strategy, be ready to buy advertising space, have fundraising numbers on speed-dial, rent a battlebus etc) but the structure for all that should have been in place. Realistically. there were only a few dates when the election could have been held - there's no excuse for them not being ready. It's bizarre.
I do wonder if the final straw was that the number of No Confidence letters was getting to close to creating a problem..
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
15 seconds in cricket, isn't? That's enough time for someone watching on tv, to tell the coach to tell the players.
Easy solution, the coaches get the game feed at the moment live, you delay it 15 seconds.
And ban any comms to people watching on tv elsewhere?
That is already delayed just because of the technology of encoding the streams (and we don't get the multi-camera replays within that time anyway). Somebody watching a stream on their ipad from the side-lines aren't going to see it in 15 seconds.
On offsides, once you have automated technology, it becomes just like goal line technology, so you have to accept the tight calls.
Hawkeye cricket is more automated than the offside and accurate to a few mm's, but they all agreed that they have the corridor of uncertainty that is larger than the accuracy of the system in which you stick with the umpires decision.
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
Why is it nonsense? If the ball was completely over the goal line by a toenail you would want the goal awarded, no?
On offsides, once you have automated technology, it becomes just like goal line technology, so you have to accept the tight calls.
I don’t think so. My argument isn’t whether they are technically offside, it is whether they are gaining an unfair advantage (the point of the law). Being offside by the width of a gnat’s chuff clearly doesn’t do that.
See also hand balls. The law I was taught was “deliberate hand ball” and we have forgotten that first word.
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends on the type of LibDem. Not necessarily the leafy village dwelling, nimby, “I want competence and a quite life” LibDem convert from the Tories in the south.
I do hope this Germany Denmark match resolves the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Wasn't it Bismarck who said, 'There are only three people who have ever understood the Schleswig-Holstein question: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German professor, who is mad; and I who have forgotten?'
Arguably Bismarck did understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. He used it as a pretext to invade Austria, resulting in the reunification of Germany.
On offsides, once you have automated technology, it becomes just like goal line technology, so you have to accept the tight calls.
Hawkeye cricket is more automated than the offside and accurate to a few mm's, but they all agreed that they have the corridor of uncertainty that is larger than the accuracy of the system in which you stick with the umpires decision.
But that's because it's predicting where the ball will go. This isn't.
On offsides, once you have automated technology, it becomes just like goal line technology, so you have to accept the tight calls.
Hawkeye cricket is more automated than the offside and accurate to a few mm's, but they all agreed that they have the corridor of uncertainty that is larger than the accuracy of the system in which you stick with the umpires decision.
But that's because it's predicting where the ball will go. This isn't.
There is actually inaccurately in the semi-automated offside. It requires human user input to line things up which can introduce a level of error, plus the pose estimation / body models used to fit to the players aren't mm's accurate. Human pose estimation from video is still a very active area of research and nobody claims it is solved to that level of accuracy, definitely not outside of controlled lab conditions.
Also, the prediction from cricket has been extensively tested and shown to be a few mm's. But as I say, they expand the region of "umpires" call far beyond the levels of error in the system i.e. there are deliveries that definitely where hitting the stumps that still get called not-out.
The problem with VAR in football is that it just seems to result in as many arguments as it ought to objectively solve.
For every one obviously wrong decision there are 10 or more that are debatable even after seeing a replay. In other sports, you're deciding if the ball hit the bat, or if the ball landed outside the court, or if the receiver caught the ball. That's not the case in football. You're deciding whether it was a foul or if it was deliberate handball.
Opinium were almost bang on in 2019 but have changed their methodology since.
I will stick with Labour on about 40%.
Sunak's strategy actually had some sense in it but he simply wasn't able to execute.
It was clearly to wrongfoot and cripple Reform, and then go for Labour on tax. And you can see that playing out in what CCHQ has done.
Almost could have worked. Had he got it right the Tories could have been up at 32-33% and Labour at 37-38% and a hung parliament.
In the end Rishi just wasn't up to it...
The thing that has shocked me the most is that the Tory fundraising has been absolutely terrible. They wouldn´t be withdrawing support from held seats, if they had enough money... but they do not. This despite the fact that Sunak must have been thinking about a snap poll for at least a little while. The fact is that the Tories seem to have been just as surprised as any other party by the early poll. Sunak squandered the one clear advantage that he had. If he had held the poll in the autumn, Farage would not even be standing, because he would be over with Trump and MAGAs for their election.
One of the things I find quite baffling about this General Election is just *why* the Tories were so surprised by the 4th July date. I'm no expert, but even I knew that there was an election coming within the next nine months - in order to meet that eventuality there need to be candidates in place (at the very least) and the local parties on standby. Those in the Party HQs no doubt have other more clever things to do (have a media strategy, be ready to buy advertising space, have fundraising numbers on speed-dial, rent a battlebus etc) but the structure for all that should have been in place. Realistically. there were only a few dates when the election could have been held - there's no excuse for them not being ready. It's bizarre.
I do wonder if the final straw was that the number of No Confidence letters was getting to close to creating a problem..
On offsides, once you have automated technology, it becomes just like goal line technology, so you have to accept the tight calls.
Hawkeye cricket is more automated than the offside and accurate to a few mm's, but they all agreed that they have the corridor of uncertainty that is larger than the accuracy of the system in which you stick with the umpires decision.
But that's because it's predicting where the ball will go. This isn't.
There is actually inaccurately in the semi-automated offside. It requires human user input to line things up which can introduce a level of error, plus the human pose estimation / body models aren't mm's accurate.
Also, the prediction from cricket has been extensively tested and shown to be a few mm's. But as I say, they expand the region of "umpires" call far beyond the levels of error in the system i.e. there are deliveries that definitely where hitting the stumps that still get called not-out.
I actually think the LBWs that are umpire's call should be not out as the umpire is supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the batsman.
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends on the type of LibDem. Not necessarily the leafy village dwelling, nimby, “I want competence and a quite life” LibDem convert from the Tories in the south.
But the Lib Dems have always been squeezable in that constituency in the past. In 1997, both Wansdyke and Kingwood were Labour, so is there any reason why the same patch can't elect Labour in 2024?
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 21 points in our latest poll for The Mail on Sunday. Con 21% (+1) Lab 42% (-) Lib Dem 11% (-) Reform 16% (-1) SNP 3% (-) Green 4% (-) Other 3%(+1) Fieldwork: 27th to 29th June 2024
I do hope this Germany Denmark match resolves the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Wasn't it Bismarck who said, 'There are only three people who have ever understood the Schleswig-Holstein question: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German professor, who is mad; and I who have forgotten?'
Arguably Bismarck did understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. He used it as a pretext to invade Austria, resulting in the reunification of Germany.
The problem with VAR in football is that it just seems to result in as many arguments as it ought to objectively solve.
I like the idea of VAR. Weren't Reading awarded a goal which hit the side netting once? Now that makes sense to me, but such marginal decisions that take five minutes to adjudicate are nuts. VAR should not be allowed to sap the spirit out of the game. It's there to ensure fair play not micrometer level judgements.
Opinium were almost bang on in 2019 but have changed their methodology since.
I will stick with Labour on about 40%.
Sunak's strategy actually had some sense in it but he simply wasn't able to execute.
It was clearly to wrongfoot and cripple Reform, and then go for Labour on tax. And you can see that playing out in what CCHQ has done.
Almost could have worked. Had he got it right the Tories could have been up at 32-33% and Labour at 37-38% and a hung parliament.
In the end Rishi just wasn't up to it...
The thing that has shocked me the most is that the Tory fundraising has been absolutely terrible. They wouldn´t be withdrawing support from held seats, if they had enough money... but they do not. This despite the fact that Sunak must have been thinking about a snap poll for at least a little while. The fact is that the Tories seem to have been just as surprised as any other party by the early poll. Sunak squandered the one clear advantage that he had. If he had held the poll in the autumn, Farage would not even be standing, because he would be over with Trump and MAGAs for their election.
One of the things I find quite baffling about this General Election is just *why* the Tories were so surprised by the 4th July date. I'm no expert, but even I knew that there was an election coming within the next nine months - in order to meet that eventuality there need to be candidates in place (at the very least) and the local parties on standby. Those in the Party HQs no doubt have other more clever things to do (have a media strategy, be ready to buy advertising space, have fundraising numbers on speed-dial, rent a battlebus etc) but the structure for all that should have been in place. Realistically. there were only a few dates when the election could have been held - there's no excuse for them not being ready. It's bizarre.
I do wonder if the final straw was that the number of No Confidence letters was getting to close to creating a problem..
Surely only Brady Old lady knows the number?
The Dems over the sea could use his help right now.
On offsides, once you have automated technology, it becomes just like goal line technology, so you have to accept the tight calls.
Hawkeye cricket is more automated than the offside and accurate to a few mm's, but they all agreed that they have the corridor of uncertainty that is larger than the accuracy of the system in which you stick with the umpires decision.
But that's because it's predicting where the ball will go. This isn't.
There is actually inaccurately in the semi-automated offside. It requires human user input to line things up which can introduce a level of error, plus the human pose estimation / body models aren't mm's accurate.
Also, the prediction from cricket has been extensively tested and shown to be a few mm's. But as I say, they expand the region of "umpires" call far beyond the levels of error in the system i.e. there are deliveries that definitely where hitting the stumps that still get called not-out.
I actually think the LBWs that are umpire's call should be not out as the umpire is supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the batsman.
Well the benefit of the doubt was given comes from an age way before the technology. We now know they were giving far too many not outs for lbw. I think the challenge system is a good balance.
On offsides, once you have automated technology, it becomes just like goal line technology, so you have to accept the tight calls.
Hawkeye cricket is more automated than the offside and accurate to a few mm's, but they all agreed that they have the corridor of uncertainty that is larger than the accuracy of the system in which you stick with the umpires decision.
But that's because it's predicting where the ball will go. This isn't.
There is actually inaccurately in the semi-automated offside. It requires human user input to line things up which can introduce a level of error, plus the human pose estimation / body models aren't mm's accurate.
Also, the prediction from cricket has been extensively tested and shown to be a few mm's. But as I say, they expand the region of "umpires" call far beyond the levels of error in the system i.e. there are deliveries that definitely where hitting the stumps that still get called not-out.
I actually think the LBWs that are umpire's call should be not out as the umpire is supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the batsman.
Well the benefit of the doubt was given comes from an age way before the technology. We now know they were giving far too many not outs for lbw. I think the challenge system is a good balance.
I don't like the fact that the decision is different for the same scenario depending on what the on-field umpire said. And, of course, that's what causes most of the anger about VAR.
Opinium were almost bang on in 2019 but have changed their methodology since.
I will stick with Labour on about 40%.
Sunak's strategy actually had some sense in it but he simply wasn't able to execute.
It was clearly to wrongfoot and cripple Reform, and then go for Labour on tax. And you can see that playing out in what CCHQ has done.
Almost could have worked. Had he got it right the Tories could have been up at 32-33% and Labour at 37-38% and a hung parliament.
In the end Rishi just wasn't up to it...
The thing that has shocked me the most is that the Tory fundraising has been absolutely terrible. They wouldn´t be withdrawing support from held seats, if they had enough money... but they do not. This despite the fact that Sunak must have been thinking about a snap poll for at least a little while. The fact is that the Tories seem to have been just as surprised as any other party by the early poll. Sunak squandered the one clear advantage that he had. If he had held the poll in the autumn, Farage would not even be standing, because he would be over with Trump and MAGAs for their election.
One of the things I find quite baffling about this General Election is just *why* the Tories were so surprised by the 4th July date. I'm no expert, but even I knew that there was an election coming within the next nine months - in order to meet that eventuality there need to be candidates in place (at the very least) and the local parties on standby. Those in the Party HQs no doubt have other more clever things to do (have a media strategy, be ready to buy advertising space, have fundraising numbers on speed-dial, rent a battlebus etc) but the structure for all that should have been in place. Realistically. there were only a few dates when the election could have been held - there's no excuse for them not being ready. It's bizarre.
I do wonder if the final straw was that the number of No Confidence letters was getting to close to creating a problem..
The problem with VAR in football is that it just seems to result in as many arguments as it ought to objectively solve.
I like the idea of VAR. Weren't Reading awarded a goal which hit the side netting once? Now that makes sense to me, but such marginal decisions that take five minutes to adjudicate are nuts. VAR should not be allowed to sap the spirit out of the game. It's there to ensure fair play not micrometer level judgements.
What I really don't like is 4th official rewinding the tape often 30s before the goal and then making decisions of potential foul play which are still judgement calls. Let the players challenge system if they think there was a clear and obvious foul that they think the ref missed, but you only get one of those, so you better be certain you are right.
Opinium were almost bang on in 2019 but have changed their methodology since.
I will stick with Labour on about 40%.
Sunak's strategy actually had some sense in it but he simply wasn't able to execute.
It was clearly to wrongfoot and cripple Reform, and then go for Labour on tax. And you can see that playing out in what CCHQ has done.
Almost could have worked. Had he got it right the Tories could have been up at 32-33% and Labour at 37-38% and a hung parliament.
In the end Rishi just wasn't up to it...
The thing that has shocked me the most is that the Tory fundraising has been absolutely terrible. They wouldn´t be withdrawing support from held seats, if they had enough money... but they do not. This despite the fact that Sunak must have been thinking about a snap poll for at least a little while. The fact is that the Tories seem to have been just as surprised as any other party by the early poll. Sunak squandered the one clear advantage that he had. If he had held the poll in the autumn, Farage would not even be standing, because he would be over with Trump and MAGAs for their election.
One of the things I find quite baffling about this General Election is just *why* the Tories were so surprised by the 4th July date. I'm no expert, but even I knew that there was an election coming within the next nine months - in order to meet that eventuality there need to be candidates in place (at the very least) and the local parties on standby. Those in the Party HQs no doubt have other more clever things to do (have a media strategy, be ready to buy advertising space, have fundraising numbers on speed-dial, rent a battlebus etc) but the structure for all that should have been in place. Realistically. there were only a few dates when the election could have been held - there's no excuse for them not being ready. It's bizarre.
I do wonder if the final straw was that the number of No Confidence letters was getting to close to creating a problem..
The problem with VAR in football is that it just seems to result in as many arguments as it ought to objectively solve.
For every one obviously wrong decision there are 10 or more that are debatable even after seeing a replay. In other sports, you're deciding if the ball hit the bat, or if the ball landed outside the court, or if the receiver caught the ball. That's not the case in football. You're deciding whether it was a foul or if it was deliberate handball.
But that is exactly the problem. It's not really being used to correct clear and obvious errors, but more an extra level of oversight on very tricky and interpretable decisions.
I'm not necessarily saying such oversight shouldn't be considered, but I don't think it's entirely the spirit within which VAR was originally introduced to address.
The problem with VAR in football is that it just seems to result in as many arguments as it ought to objectively solve.
For every one obviously wrong decision there are 10 or more that are debatable even after seeing a replay. In other sports, you're deciding if the ball hit the bat, or if the ball landed outside the court, or if the receiver caught the ball. That's not the case in football. You're deciding whether it was a foul or if it was deliberate handball.
But that is exactly the problem. It's not really being used to correct clear and obvious errors, but more an extra level of oversight on very tricky and interpretable decisions.
I'm not necessarily saying such oversight shouldn't be considered, but I don't think it's entirely the spirit within which VAR was originally introduced to address.
Problem is, you have to draw the line somewhere. The ghost goal at Watford (okay, goal line tech solves that)? Henchoz handball on the line in the 2001 Cup Final? Henry handball v ireland? Ramos dislocating Salah's shoulder?
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 21 points in our latest poll for The Mail on Sunday. Con 21% (+1) Lab 42% (-) Lib Dem 11% (-) Reform 16% (-1) SNP 3% (-) Green 4% (-) Other 3%(+1) Fieldwork: 27th to 29th June 2024
The problem with VAR in football is that it just seems to result in as many arguments as it ought to objectively solve.
That's because, unlike cricket or tennis, so many decisions have a degree of subjectivity to them. Even offsides - which are as black and white as could be - there's sometimes questions over whether someone is or isn't interfering with play. Furthermore, the rules as originally devised are designed to be applied with some common sense and interpretation.
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
I totally agree with you on making VAR a challenge system to limit VAR's impact. It's also used in American football, by the way.
It would also provide an opportunity to get away with the "clear and obvious error" criteria that causes havoc by creating ambiguity in the rules. Once an incident is challenged, the incident could be looked at afresh by VAR regardless of the onfield decision and the referee would have no say in the final VAR decision.
Just 2 challenges per team per match would suffice. If challenges were used up through ill considered challenges and a team then got a poor decision from the referee, then instead of moaning at the referee they would have to blame themselves for frittering those challenges away. So using challenges wisely would become just part of the skill of playing football. Just as it is in cricket.
I do hope this Germany Denmark match resolves the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Wasn't it Bismarck who said, 'There are only three people who have ever understood the Schleswig-Holstein question: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German professor, who is mad; and I who have forgotten?'
Arguably Bismarck did understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. He used it as a pretext to invade Austria, resulting in the reunification of Germany.
My brother married a German in German Schleswig. It was a hybrid wedding with some English and some German traditions. One of the British traditions was the Best Man's Speech, which was a concept quite alien to German ears.
It started "Welcome to this beautiful celebration in a delightful part of Germany, formerly part of Denmark..."
The British laughed uproriously, the Germans were stonily silent. The speech went downhill after that.
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends where, in Epping Forest a lot of LDs would vote Tory over Labour on a forced choice
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 21 points in our latest poll for The Mail on Sunday. Con 21% (+1) Lab 42% (-) Lib Dem 11% (-) Reform 16% (-1) SNP 3% (-) Green 4% (-) Other 3%(+1) Fieldwork: 27th to 29th June 2024
The problem with VAR in football is that it just seems to result in as many arguments as it ought to objectively solve.
That's because, unlike cricket or tennis, so many decisions have a degree of subjectivity to them. Even offsides - which are as black and white as could be - there's sometimes questions over whether someone is or isn't interfering with play. Furthermore, the rules as originally devised are designed to be applied with some common sense and interpretation.
I agree, and it's a fair point.
But I would have said the original rationale for the introduction of VAR was very much more along the lines of "it'll solve a lot of this stuff by removing the interpretation element via technology", rather than "it'll act as an extra pair of eyes and increase the consideration of the interpretable events", so in that sense it hasn't really worked as intended.
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends where, in Epping Forest a lot of LDs would vote Tory over Labour on a forced choice
Usually that could be true. We saw in 2015 where a lot of former LD voters went in places like the SW.
Now? With Sir Keir Starmer at the helm of Labour and not Revolution Jezza?
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends where, in Epping Forest a lot of LDs would vote Tory over Labour on a forced choice
Usually that could be true. We saw in 2015 where a lot of former LD voters went in places like the SW.
Now? With Sir Keir Starmer at the helm of Labour and not Revolution Jezza?
Most would still vote Tory as Starmer could come after the equity in their big homes and they also dislike his plans to build on the greenbelt
I do hope this Germany Denmark match resolves the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Wasn't it Bismarck who said, 'There are only three people who have ever understood the Schleswig-Holstein question: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German professor, who is mad; and I who have forgotten?'
Arguably Bismarck did understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. He used it as a pretext to invade Austria, resulting in the reunification of Germany.
My brother married a German in German Schleswig. It was a hybrid wedding with some English and some German traditions. One of the British traditions was the Best Man's Speech, which was a concept quite alien to German ears.
It started "Welcome to this beautiful celebration in a delightful part of Germany, formerly part of Denmark..."
The British laughed uproriously, the Germans were stonily silent. The speech went downhill after that.
Tbf Foxy, you should have steered clear of that topic when you gave the speech.
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends where, in Epping Forest a lot of LDs would vote Tory over Labour on a forced choice
Usually that could be true. We saw in 2015 where a lot of former LD voters went in places like the SW.
Now? With Sir Keir Starmer at the helm of Labour and not Revolution Jezza?
They would still vote Tory as Starmer could come after the equity in their big homes and they also dislike his plans to build on the greenbelt
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 21 points in our latest poll for The Mail on Sunday. Con 21% (+1) Lab 42% (-) Lib Dem 11% (-) Reform 16% (-1) SNP 3% (-) Green 4% (-) Other 3%(+1) Fieldwork: 27th to 29th June 2024
I do hope this Germany Denmark match resolves the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Wasn't it Bismarck who said, 'There are only three people who have ever understood the Schleswig-Holstein question: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German professor, who is mad; and I who have forgotten?'
Arguably Bismarck did understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. He used it as a pretext to invade Austria, resulting in the reunification of Germany.
My brother married a German in German Schleswig. It was a hybrid wedding with some English and some German traditions. One of the British traditions was the Best Man's Speech, which was a concept quite alien to German ears.
It started "Welcome to this beautiful celebration in a delightful part of Germany, formerly part of Denmark..."
The British laughed uproriously, the Germans were stonily silent. The speech went downhill after that.
Tbf Foxy, you should have steered clear of that topic when you gave the speech.
You mentioned it once. And you didn't get away with it...
VAR should be a challenge system like in cricket or tennis. End of. Totally ruins the game like this.
But what difference would it make? The only way that doesn't get given is if the Germans don't appeal, which doesn't seem a good way of fixing it.
No a team has to appeal that they think something has been missed or wrong decision. Limited number of challenges. Germany weren't appealing for a penalty there.
What would the time limit be? Only needs someone watching on tv to be able to see it pretty quickly.
Like cricket, the on field captain has to make the challenge and within a short space of time. The players are very aware if they believe real foul play has taken place.
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
I totally agree with you on making VAR a challenge system to limit VAR's impact. It's also used in American football, by the way.
It would also provide an opportunity to get away with the "clear and obvious error" criteria that causes havoc by creating ambiguity in the rules. Once an incident is challenged, the incident could be looked at afresh by VAR regardless of the onfield decision and the referee would have no say in the final VAR decision.
Just 2 challenges per team per match would suffice. If challenges were used up through ill considered challenges and a team then got a poor decision from the referee, then instead of moaning at the referee they would have to blame themselves for frittering those challenges away. So using challenges wisely would become just part of the skill of playing football. Just as it is in cricket.
Worth saying that in the NFL, the on-field decision is the default if it isn't a clear and obvious error. I think it's unlikely that the clear and obvious error aspect of VAR would be done away with if a challenge system came in.
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends where, in Epping Forest a lot of LDs would vote Tory over Labour on a forced choice
Usually that could be true. We saw in 2015 where a lot of former LD voters went in places like the SW.
Now? With Sir Keir Starmer at the helm of Labour and not Revolution Jezza?
Most would still vote Tory as Starmer could come after the equity in their big homes and they also dislike his plans to build on the greenbelt
Aren't the 2010 LDs that became 2015 Tories the 2019 Tories that you're losing to Lib Dems?, the 2010 LDs that stayed LD would be more likely to be squeezed to Labour rather then the Tories now unless you can come up with a reason why they couldn't be squeezed to Tories by Cameron but will be by Sunak.
Five years of Labour fucking up will be a great recruiting seargeant for the Conservatives.
Again.
Be careful what you wish for.
If Labour do screw up of course your team may not be the net beneficiary. We could all be goose stepping down the High Street to Farage/Trump/ Putin's tune.
Not "all".
I don't think in Farage/Trump/Putin's Little England attending Nuremberg style rallies outside Sandwell Civic Hall will be optional.
Right wing traditional media - Express, Mail, Telegraph - surely taking a huge risk of being left behind and seen as irrelevant as they throw everything and the last two kitchen sinks at trying to persuade their readers to stop a Labour government?
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 21 points in our latest poll for The Mail on Sunday. Con 21% (+1) Lab 42% (-) Lib Dem 11% (-) Reform 16% (-1) SNP 3% (-) Green 4% (-) Other 3%(+1) Fieldwork: 27th to 29th June 2024
I do hope this Germany Denmark match resolves the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Wasn't it Bismarck who said, 'There are only three people who have ever understood the Schleswig-Holstein question: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German professor, who is mad; and I who have forgotten?'
Arguably Bismarck did understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. He used it as a pretext to invade Austria, resulting in the reunification of Germany.
My brother married a German in German Schleswig. It was a hybrid wedding with some English and some German traditions. One of the British traditions was the Best Man's Speech, which was a concept quite alien to German ears.
It started "Welcome to this beautiful celebration in a delightful part of Germany, formerly part of Denmark..."
The British laughed uproriously, the Germans were stonily silent. The speech went downhill after that.
I bet the inflatable Spitfire went down well though?
I do hope this Germany Denmark match resolves the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Wasn't it Bismarck who said, 'There are only three people who have ever understood the Schleswig-Holstein question: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German professor, who is mad; and I who have forgotten?'
Arguably Bismarck did understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. He used it as a pretext to invade Austria, resulting in the reunification of Germany.
My brother married a German in German Schleswig. It was a hybrid wedding with some English and some German traditions. One of the British traditions was the Best Man's Speech, which was a concept quite alien to German ears.
It started "Welcome to this beautiful celebration in a delightful part of Germany, formerly part of Denmark..."
The British laughed uproriously, the Germans were stonily silent. The speech went downhill after that.
160 years is too soon I guess. Then again people in Newport are still grumpy that Saffron Walden took their market in the 14th century (or possibly earlier) so it barely registers on the petty, irrational grudge scale.
Right wing traditional media - Express, Mail, Telegraph - surely taking a huge risk of being left behind and seen as irrelevant as they throw everything and the last two kitchen sinks at trying to persuade their readers to stop a Labour government?
Parties and the media itself seem deeply conflicted on the value of and influence of media.
Parties dismiss it is inconsequential if it says they will lose, they insist they can overcome it. When they don't, the lay at least some blame on a hostile media environment.
Media would claim to just be reporting and providing comment, and dismiss criticism of their political bias influencing things, but still want to act with the importance that endorsements implies they hold.
I'm more in the camp that there is little influence, and media follows rather than sets agendas. But they still have loose ideological thrusts, and abandoning all pretence at that by not making some kind of defence for purported ideological bedfellows, might undermine the seriousness people can ascribe to them, even if their own readerships are not all behind that view.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 21 points in our latest poll for The Mail on Sunday. Con 21% (+1) Lab 42% (-) Lib Dem 11% (-) Reform 16% (-1) SNP 3% (-) Green 4% (-) Other 3%(+1) Fieldwork: 27th to 29th June 2024
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 21 points in our latest poll for The Mail on Sunday. Con 21% (+1) Lab 42% (-) Lib Dem 11% (-) Reform 16% (-1) SNP 3% (-) Green 4% (-) Other 3%(+1) Fieldwork: 27th to 29th June 2024
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends where, in Epping Forest a lot of LDs would vote Tory over Labour on a forced choice
Usually that could be true. We saw in 2015 where a lot of former LD voters went in places like the SW.
Now? With Sir Keir Starmer at the helm of Labour and not Revolution Jezza?
They would still vote Tory as Starmer could come after the equity in their big homes and they also dislike his plans to build on the greenbelt
The latest polls have Labour polling below 1997 levels and not much higher than Corbyn 2017 levels so it is working partly. If Sunak can squeeze RefUK and LD voters in Labour v Tory marginals it might work even more
Labour would squeeze LD voters better than the Tories would.
Depends where, in Epping Forest a lot of LDs would vote Tory over Labour on a forced choice
Usually that could be true. We saw in 2015 where a lot of former LD voters went in places like the SW.
Now? With Sir Keir Starmer at the helm of Labour and not Revolution Jezza?
They would still vote Tory as Starmer could come after the equity in their big homes and they also dislike his plans to build on the greenbelt
File under "Everyone thinks like me".
If only they did. Clearly I am always right, so the world would be a better, though much wordier, place.
I do hope this Germany Denmark match resolves the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Wasn't it Bismarck who said, 'There are only three people who have ever understood the Schleswig-Holstein question: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German professor, who is mad; and I who have forgotten?'
Arguably Bismarck did understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. He used it as a pretext to invade Austria, resulting in the reunification of Germany.
My brother married a German in German Schleswig. It was a hybrid wedding with some English and some German traditions. One of the British traditions was the Best Man's Speech, which was a concept quite alien to German ears.
It started "Welcome to this beautiful celebration in a delightful part of Germany, formerly part of Denmark..."
The British laughed uproriously, the Germans were stonily silent. The speech went downhill after that.
I bet the inflatable Spitfire went down well though?
I am just blown away by this anecdote. It's on a par with How glad we are that when the bride dismounted from the cattle truck, the groom directed her recht und nicht links
Comments
One thing I definitely change is offside, if it is super tight, you stay with on field decision (like cricket). Its nonsense when they are ruling goals offside when a toenail was in front.
https://conservativehome.com/2024/06/28/lord-ashcroft-its-a-metaphor-for-the-whole-conservative-government-my-focus-groups-in-newquay-plymouth-and-ne-somerset/
The Norwegian is Ragnarok
That actually ADDS to the drama - and the required skill of the captaincy and coach
Also, it's a continuous game. So, you'd have situations where they'd have to check if the appeal was in time as it could be a review for anything.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/29/i-dont-know-anyone-voting-for-him-is-this-the-end-for-jacob-rees-mogg
I do wonder if the final straw was that the number of No Confidence letters was getting to close to creating a problem..
See also hand balls. The law I was taught was “deliberate hand ball” and we have forgotten that first word.
(It's all a bit complicated).
No, not Tennant.
https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1807146950027788672?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
Also, the prediction from cricket has been extensively tested and shown to be a few mm's. But as I say, they expand the region of "umpires" call far beyond the levels of error in the system i.e. there are deliveries that definitely where hitting the stumps that still get called not-out.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨
Labour lead by 21 points in our latest poll for The Mail on Sunday.
Con 21% (+1)
Lab 42% (-)
Lib Dem 11% (-)
Reform 16% (-1)
SNP 3% (-)
Green 4% (-)
Other 3%(+1)
Fieldwork: 27th to 29th June 2024
https://x.com/DeltapollUK/status/1807157114185642148
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_Schleswig_plebiscites
I really hate to sound combative, but what is the subtext of this post if it is not I am a complete and utter arse?
Mind you, if I had BBC 1 on I would be grateful for the warning.
I'm not necessarily saying such oversight shouldn't be considered, but I don't think it's entirely the spirit within which VAR was originally introduced to address.
It would also provide an opportunity to get away with the "clear and obvious error" criteria that causes havoc by creating ambiguity in the rules. Once an incident is challenged, the incident could be looked at afresh by VAR regardless of the onfield decision and the referee would have no say in the final VAR decision.
Just 2 challenges per team per match would suffice. If challenges were used up through ill considered challenges and a team then got a poor decision from the referee, then instead of moaning at the referee they would have to blame themselves for frittering those challenges away. So using challenges wisely would become just part of the skill of playing football. Just as it is in cricket.
It started "Welcome to this beautiful celebration in a delightful part of Germany, formerly part of Denmark..."
The British laughed uproriously, the Germans were stonily silent. The speech went downhill after that.
George Mann
@sgfmann
·
25m
The Daily Telegraph: Labour will bankrupt every generation, warns Sunak
#TomorrowsPapersToday
But I would have said the original rationale for the introduction of VAR was very much more along the lines of "it'll solve a lot of this stuff by removing the interpretation element via technology", rather than "it'll act as an extra pair of eyes and increase the consideration of the interpretable events", so in that sense it hasn't really worked as intended.
Now? With Sir Keir Starmer at the helm of Labour and not Revolution Jezza?
Con 55
Lab 476
LD 70
Ref 6
Green 3
SNP 18
PC 3
Others 19
Parties dismiss it is inconsequential if it says they will lose, they insist they can overcome it. When they don't, the lay at least some blame on a hostile media environment.
Media would claim to just be reporting and providing comment, and dismiss criticism of their political bias influencing things, but still want to act with the importance that endorsements implies they hold.
I'm more in the camp that there is little influence, and media follows rather than sets agendas. But they still have loose ideological thrusts, and abandoning all pretence at that by not making some kind of defence for purported ideological bedfellows, might undermine the seriousness people can ascribe to them, even if their own readerships are not all behind that view.
Daisy Christodoulou @daisychristo
I guess it is appropriate that the ultimate shark-jumping VAR moment came in the Schleswig-Holstein match.
VAR is so complicated, only three people have ever understood it. One is dead, the second's gone mad and the third has forgotten all about it.
They better hope the tactical voting they have in their model pans out to the level they predict on Thursday
Royal Mail might be part of the late delivery problem, but I'm not
#unmusikalisch