11 hours ago, Mike E said:

I think the Glasgow Willy Wonka Experience shows that AI has a way to go before it can overtake actual creativity.

As long as its good enough to rip off my cowboy of an estate agents photos, it'll do for now 🤣

If they want to stamp diving out of the game, VAR needs to be able to recommend yellows where there is diving. 

I checked 3 hours ago and there was 25 mins left. I've just checked again and there's 23 mins left... 

Sammie surely goes down as a Rovers legend in the short stint he's had here. The only player to show some bollocks this season and will be the only reason we stay up. 

Where's waggot with the coach, quick park it in front of the goal! 

After recommendations for AI photo editing. Specifically I upload a photo I've taken and ask it to amend the photo in some way e.g. remove the fruit bowl from the table- that kind of thing. @DE.do you know of anything? 

The club will end the year in a profit yet some fans will still be "WhA taBOuT fFp, u DoNt uNdErStAnD" 

It's 7:46, have we conceded yet? 

Pickford 

Walker Stones Maguire Chilwell

Trent Rice Bellingham 

Saka Kane Foden

A plausible Southgate selection and one that could go far. I think he's just got to have the balls to play that midfield 3. 

5 minutes ago, speeeeeeedie said:

Ten Hag set them up to play on the counter

He shouldn't have put concrete in Rashfords boots then! 

39 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

He's just never in a rush.

That was one hell of a strike though, still rising when it hit the underside of the crossbar.

A match where I found myself hoping CIty would win. It's a funny old game.

I was watching with Liverpool fans who were cheering when United scored - it was like a parallel universe. 

Rushford, apart from the goal, was absolutely gash. 

I reckon city get a points deduction and stripped of some titles but they won't get relegated. If they did get relegated that's one of the automatic spots tied up in an instant. Makes it harder to get out the division.  

That ref they've signed looks decent 

1 hour ago, arbitro said:

For me it's a clear and obvious error correctly overturned. Endo was there to block Colwill and allow Van Dyke a clear header and as such deliberately blocked him. A real clue is that Endo isn't looking where the ball is. In my view a clear transgression of the law and correctly ruled out.

Blocking is so prevalent right now and in a congested penalty area I think difficult to spot in real time. One of the reasons VAR was introduced was to assist in these type of situations and on this occasion it was the right decision.

But at the same time he's not making a move towards the player, he's literally just stood there, we shouldn't be giving fouls for someone running into someone else. The contact is initiated by colwill running at endo, why should he move out the way?

4 hours ago, arbitro said:

I actually thought it was the correct decision but the official line was that Endo was offside from the first ball into the penalty area is what I would dispute. Technically he was but didn't interfere with play immediately but then he deliberately blocked Colwill who was marking Van Dyke allowing him a free header. For me the offence is the block rather than the offside it was disallowed for. I think that if he hadn't blocked Colwill then Van Dyke wouldn't have scored.

I dunno, he stood his ground and Colwill should go round him. I'd not say that was a foul by endo. Certainly not enough to overturn the decision based on this 'clear and obvious' criteria that appears to be in place. 

The decision was that he was offside when the ball went in (correct) and then interfered with play by being in the way of the defender. Who wants to see goals being chalked off because of that? 

And with a bizzarely disallowed goal. That's not what VAR was brought in for. 

The point of VAR was to eliminate howlers, not trying to find any reason possible not to give goals. 

Chucked young Adam into my fantasy team for this one. Bag a hattrick lad! 

15 hours ago, ScorpioRover said:

Whatever happened to the official rovers forum that was on rovers.co.uk? must of been 10 years or more since i was on it and it doesnt seem to be about anymore?

It got shut down for some reason so I migrated over to lurking on here before signing up a few years later

1 hour ago, philipl said:

I don't believe we have a sell on.

Hope I am wrong but I don't think so. 

That would be gross negligence if true... so you're probably right. 

Actually the second link has him on 4.6k a week which sounds more like it. 

11 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Signed a new one in February ‘21.

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2021/february/new-deal-for-dolan/

Wow. At that point he'd got himself into the first tean and bagged a few goals and he signed a £600 a week contract? 

Am I right in thinking Dolan hasn't had a new deal since he joined from being released from PNE U18s? 

Just over 30k a year though, we should maybe crowd fund for his heating bill

4 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

I can find a rule saying only an authorised signatory (usually the CEO or Secretary) can sign the transfer documentation.

I can’t find one saying they’re the only people who can submit it.

Theres every chance I’m just missing it though.

 

This would make more sense to me. The more senior you become the more clueless you seem to become when using portals (generally) I've tried to teach 3 different financial controllers how to log on to various portals to review, approve and submit various documents. Within 2 minutes they've all said "are you able to email me all the documents and I can approve via email and you just make sure we file the email chain somewhere and you submit it for me"