Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Far from being a great personal sacrifice for the team what it actually was was rank amateur defending.
As a defender you should never charge out like that, arms raised, coz its asking to have a penalty awarded against you. Not only did he make the mistake against Liverpool but he then repeated it 10 days later.
Compare it to the Chelsea defender charging down Moses shot who deliberately moved his arms to his side & even though he turned into the ball & it struck his arm (like the ball struck Caldwell) there was no way the ref was going to give a penalty for itThese 2 mistakes are in all honestly blots on an otherwise good set of performances since Bobby switched to 3 at the back but I think to paint it as the original poster has is a bit wide of the mark
I’m sure Tyldesley will post and disagree, but I maintain that if a referee has the opportunity of double checking a decision, he’ll (or she’ll….) take it.As it happens I agree with you & said pretty much the same thing on another Latics website only last week.
If you allow video technology to be introduced for everything then the ref is gonna be that scared of making a mistake & “not using the tools available to them” that they’ll start using it all the time.
There’s also the added problem that at what point do you stop play? A Ref could thinka foul has been committed & blow for it to be checked as a team is attacking. If the footage then shows that no foul was committed the attacking team are gonna be mightily peeved. So in that instance does the ref wait for the next time the ball is out of play. That could be several minutes down the line & if the footage shows a foul was committed is play brought back & a free kick awarded with the 4 minutes of time added back on. It’ll be a nightmareMy worry with goalline technology is that it will be the thin end of the wedge i.e. when it works well are people then going to start arguing “look how well its work it’d be stupid not to introduce it elsewhere during the game” & then as someone has stated you’ll end up with 3 hour games
It wasn’t the best penalty in the world – to near the middle of the goal & to close to a keepers natural body position when diving.
However Al Habsi deserves great credit as he actually dived past the ball & his reflexes allowed him to compensate for that & get his arm to the ball. On top of that at the speed the ball was travelling it needed a strong arm & it got oneWorking in Lievrpool I read the match reports in both the Post & the Echo & as someone else was stated it was pretty much all about Liverpool being thwarted by an inspired keeper (again apparently).
Now don’t get me wrong, I think Al Habsi played well but did he really have that much to do? According to the stats they had 9 shots on target including the penalty & Suarez’s overhead kick that Caldwell saved. Aside from that I can remember 2 good saves early on, the save from Johnson which was hit at his feet & a save from a free kick. That leaves 3 efforts which haven’t even registered with me. I hardly think that warrants the “we’d have battered em if it hadn’t been for the keeper” slant2 clean sheets in a row??? Didn’t the Chelsea game finish 1-1??/ :oops:
The current formation finally seems to be one that suits the players in his squad as opposed to being one that players are shoe horned into. On top of that it’s good to see (IMO at least) that Bobby seems to have realised that if he plays with 1 up front then it needs a certain type of player to play that role & not just your best & quickest out & out goal scorer
For me Di Santo & Rodallega are better footballers than Sammon & will score more goals than him but playing Sammon in that role allows other players to pose more of an attacking threat
Very, very early days but (Arsenal game apart) I do like what I’ve seen of this formation since the Blackburn gameIf somebody is offended by language used by somebody then it isn’t really down to anybody else to tell them that it isn’t offensive
In this instance Alan Hansen has used a term which some people find offensive when used to describe them. I don’t think anyone has claimed Hansen meant to offend but he has apologised if his use of that term offended anyone as it wasn’t his intent & that apology seems to have been accepted
The only people continuing to make a fuss about it are the “anti-PC” brigade who seem to see offending people (deliberately or not) as some form of basic human right. What is wrong of you offend somebody in apologising for that?
To take it out of its racial context if you’re at the match & launch into a tirade of abuse Jordi Gomez coz he’s misplaced a pass, some of that tirade includes foul & abusive language and the woman in front asks if you’ll mind your language as she doesn’t want her 2 young children to have to hear that, I imagine the vast majority of people would apologise.
Not go on some rant about the woman being PC & what’s the world coming to when you can’t even question the ability & parentage of our midfield dynamo without some no good do gooder getting on your backOne player’s word against another.No one else heard anything,how can that be right.That’s not what has happened though is it? Despite Liverpool doing their best to portray that as fact.
From what i can gather Evra has made a complaint that Suarez used a certain phrase towards him during the match which he found racially offensive. Luis Suarez has stated that he did use a particular Spanish phrase (presumably the one Evra has said he made) but that he didn’t mean it offensively because it isn’t an offensive term in Uruguay – he’s then gone on to claim that he only used it because that is what his United colleagues call him (which I doubt as only De Gea & Valencia from the 1st team squad speak Spanish).The FA have decided on the basis of what both players have stated & after having taken advice from independent bodies that, whatever the intent behind it, that the term is racially offensive, that they can’t be seen to accept the “I didn’t know it was offensive” argument (in law ignorance of the law is no excuse as a defence & it would allow virtually anybody charged with insulting, offensive or abusive language to use the same argument).
That said, the punishment should be the same as it would have been had the ref heard it & deemed it a sending off offence & I’m not sure 8 games would have been the punishment.
What I did find distasteful last night was Martin Tyler’s references to Suarez as being able to enjoy his football/see the funny side of things etc.. less than 24 hours after the FA have found him guilty of using racist & offensive language. An experienced media pundit like him should have shown a bit more neutrality or just not commented on the issue at all
In my defence, as a non-ESPN subscriber who was left holding the babies on Saturday my knowledge of the players performances is limited to the 8 or so minutes MOTD showed on Saturday night
Bit of a gutter as I’d avoided the score all evening & sat down with some nice chilled beers to watch the extended highlights on Sky’s Football First only to discover at 10.15 that they aren’t allowed to show extended coverage of the game ESPN have shown!!! :angry: :angry:
Interesting points from the club statementwhen your name goes on the clubs ‘database’ – it is only on there for a period of time
even if you are not on the ‘database’ if you ring the club and explain your personal circumstances you may well get a ticket
Somebody posted on Wiganer.net the other week asking whether anyone would get them a ticket for the Arsenal game i think as the ticket office/internet wouldn’t let them.
Someone else told them to e-mail the club & explain their circumstances & a short while later the original poster went back on to say the club had sorted them out with tickets.
Don’t know what sort of criteria the club use in such circumstances but I’d imagine that if Keane had sued his noggin instead of losing his temper and gone to the club reception/office then he’d have been sorted with ticketsThe club should allow the ticket office staff to use some common sense. I understand the one rule for the rich & one rule for us plebs type comment someone else has made but if it is just some average Joe then even with a Wigan address you can’t guarantee that they won’t be a supporter of the opposition (particularly with a local derby like Liverpool tonight) but if the bloke/woman in question can prove that they are Roy Keane/Alex Ferguson/Beyone Knowles then there isn’t a problem on that score – even if the computer system won’t allow them to print a ticket at the ticket office the staff in there should be told to send em round to the main office
…I’ve asked on the referees association forum …
That sounds like a barrel of laughs ;)[/quote]
The hilarity never stops!!
That’s why everyone thinks you refs are all w@nkers ;)I maintain it would have been given at Stamford Bridge – or indeed, at the other end of the pitch on Saturday
Since I stepped up to run the line in the contrib leagues this season I’ve had plenty of supporters vocally expressing that opinion to me – Runcorn Linnets fans in particular!!!
For your benefit Griff I’ve asked on the referees association forum what other refs would have given & I’ll let you know the feedback.
I maintain it wouldn’t have been given at Stamford Bridge – or indeed, at the other end of the pitch on Saturday. Us refs are as honest as the day is long
I think he’d make a cracking wing back as he’s good on the ball, has a good engine on him, packs a mean shot, can defend (most of the time) & can put in a decent cross.
I like the new system Bobby’s been playing recently as it seems to play to the squads strengths, but I’d liek to see it with Boyce as one of the 3 centre backs, Figueroa at wing back & Jones/McArthur in the middle instead of McCarthy
I don’t agree with the policy but understand why it was introduced.
However when the club explain the reasons that it was introduced & then say that’s why the couldn’t let Roy Keane in, far from making the club look in the right, it makes them look ridiculous.
Would letting Roy Keane in on Saturday have caused any trouble in the ground or led to the club being hit with a fine for failing to control the crowd? – even with Roy Keane’s temper I doubt itAll the statement released yesterday basically says is that we can’t sell on matchdays to non-database people for specific games coz we’ve no idea that a certain person is who they say they are & they live where they say they live. However when someone turns up & can prove that they are who they say they are & live where they say they live we still won’t let them in
Why?
Er, go on then, I’ll have a stab. Because he brought his arms in front of his body and it hit his arm. Seen em given, seen ’em not.
Bet it would have been given against us at Stamford Bridge.[/quote]
I’ll be perfectly honest & say that I can’t ever recall seeing a penalty given in such circumstances.
Yes he moved his arms, but he moved him arms away from his side to deliberately try & avoid them being hit by the ball. The later movement of his body was an instinctive movement that virtually everybody makes when about to be struck by an object in order to make the area of impact on your body smaller.
There was nothing deliberate about the contact of his arm on the ball & had his arm not been there it would have hit his body anyway & had the same result i.e. blocking the shot. Had his arms been away from his body & then blocked the shot then yep its a pen but not in the circumstances that happened on SaturdayIt’s only conjecture but I doubt that any ref at any ground involving any teams would have given that as a handball
The one last night was nailed on though
