Rival Watch

17149 posts
Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Rival Watch

by Nameless » 29 Dec 2020 09:25

Hendo
Stranded
royalp-we Hate to say it but I think we’ll be bringing up that Oliver Langford sh*tshow come May.


We may well do but if we miss out by a point or two then, so far, the 2nd half horror show at Bournemouth or the failure to beat 10 man Brumby including missing a pen would be just as culpable.


Agree, unless you miss out on something after winning every other game, it’s hard to justify pointing at poor performance from a referee in one game. It could also be argued that we didn’t create that many decent opportunities in that half, anyway.


If we miss out narrowly then if we are really honest we should actually be massively pleased with how close we came !
If Paunovic does manage to take a team that had looked more like relegation contenders than promotion chasers for several seasons and without spending any money , and with a horrendous injury list, got them to the point where we can even think one refereeing performance ‘cost’ us then that would be quite incredible.
Disappointing, but pretty impressive.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39391
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Rival Watch

by Snowflake Royal » 29 Dec 2020 10:02

Hendo
Stranded
royalp-we Hate to say it but I think we’ll be bringing up that Oliver Langford sh*tshow come May.


We may well do but if we miss out by a point or two then, so far, the 2nd half horror show at Bournemouth or the failure to beat 10 man Brumby including missing a pen would be just as culpable.


Agree, unless you miss out on something after winning every other game, it’s hard to justify pointing at poor performance from a referee in one game. It could also be argued that we didn’t create that many decent opportunities in that half, anyway.

4 penalties is quite a few chances.

User avatar
Hendo
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 21033
Joined: 25 Mar 2012 20:53
Location: Lambs to the cosmic slaughter

Re: Rival Watch

by Hendo » 29 Dec 2020 10:11

Snowflake Royal
Hendo
Stranded
We may well do but if we miss out by a point or two then, so far, the 2nd half horror show at Bournemouth or the failure to beat 10 man Brumby including missing a pen would be just as culpable.


Agree, unless you miss out on something after winning every other game, it’s hard to justify pointing at poor performance from a referee in one game. It could also be argued that we didn’t create that many decent opportunities in that half, anyway.

4 penalties is quite a few chances.


They aren’t really chances when you’re having to rely on a ref to give them to you.

I don’t seem to remember their keeper making any real saves in the second half. We huffed and puffed in that second half without really doing anything of note, apart from trying to win a few penalties.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39391
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Rival Watch

by Snowflake Royal » 29 Dec 2020 10:15

Hendo
Snowflake Royal
Hendo
Agree, unless you miss out on something after winning every other game, it’s hard to justify pointing at poor performance from a referee in one game. It could also be argued that we didn’t create that many decent opportunities in that half, anyway.

4 penalties is quite a few chances.


They aren’t really chances when you’re having to rely on a ref to give them to you.

I don’t seem to remember their keeper making any real saves in the second half. We huffed and puffed in that second half without really doing anything of note, apart from trying to win a few penalties.

They certainly are chances, if the opposition have to foul you or handle the ball to stop them.

Their keeper didn't make saves because every time we got near their box we were fouled.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Rival Watch

by Nameless » 29 Dec 2020 11:14

Snowflake Royal
Hendo
Snowflake Royal 4 penalties is quite a few chances.


They aren’t really chances when you’re having to rely on a ref to give them to you.

I don’t seem to remember their keeper making any real saves in the second half. We huffed and puffed in that second half without really doing anything of note, apart from trying to win a few penalties.

They certainly are chances, if the opposition have to foul you or handle the ball to stop them.

Their keeper didn't make saves because every time we got near their box we were fouled.


I would suggest a large proportion of penalties were not ‘chances’.
The Norwich pen was not a chance, neither was the one Luton should have had.


muirinho
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2075
Joined: 20 Jan 2016 12:10

Re: Rival Watch

by muirinho » 29 Dec 2020 11:34

Hendo
Stranded
royalp-we Hate to say it but I think we’ll be bringing up that Oliver Langford sh*tshow come May.


We may well do but if we miss out by a point or two then, so far, the 2nd half horror show at Bournemouth or the failure to beat 10 man Brumby including missing a pen would be just as culpable.


Agree, unless you miss out on something after winning every other game, it’s hard to justify pointing at poor performance from a referee in one game. It could also be argued that we didn’t create that many decent opportunities in that half, anyway.


A penalty isn't a guaranteed goal, but the handball one stopped a certain goal. If they'd gone behind, the tactic of putting 10 behind the ball wouldn't have been any more use to them, the game would have opened up, and more than likely we'd have scored more. Langford cost us two points that day, without a shadow of a doubt.

It is of course possible to argue that the ref saved us two points against Luton, but that is considerably less clear-cut than the two points we were denied.

The games where Reading didn't perform aren't "culpable" in the same way. If we miss out because of those, it's because the team isn't good enough. If we miss out because of a referee, that's a different story.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39391
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Rival Watch

by Snowflake Royal » 29 Dec 2020 12:13

Nameless
Snowflake Royal
Hendo
They aren’t really chances when you’re having to rely on a ref to give them to you.

I don’t seem to remember their keeper making any real saves in the second half. We huffed and puffed in that second half without really doing anything of note, apart from trying to win a few penalties.

They certainly are chances, if the opposition have to foul you or handle the ball to stop them.

Their keeper didn't make saves because every time we got near their box we were fouled.


I would suggest a large proportion of penalties were not ‘chances’.
The Norwich pen was not a chance, neither was the one Luton should have had.

What's Norwich or Luton got to do with it?

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39391
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Rival Watch

by Snowflake Royal » 29 Dec 2020 12:16

muirinho
Hendo
Stranded
We may well do but if we miss out by a point or two then, so far, the 2nd half horror show at Bournemouth or the failure to beat 10 man Brumby including missing a pen would be just as culpable.


Agree, unless you miss out on something after winning every other game, it’s hard to justify pointing at poor performance from a referee in one game. It could also be argued that we didn’t create that many decent opportunities in that half, anyway.


A penalty isn't a guaranteed goal, but the handball one stopped a certain goal. If they'd gone behind, the tactic of putting 10 behind the ball wouldn't have been any more use to them, the game would have opened up, and more than likely we'd have scored more. Langford cost us two points that day, without a shadow of a doubt.

It is of course possible to argue that the ref saved us two points against Luton, but that is considerably less clear-cut than the two points we were denied.

The games where Reading didn't perform aren't "culpable" in the same way. If we miss out because of those, it's because the team isn't good enough. If we miss out because of a referee, that's a different story.

Agreed. If it's one, maybe two decisions, yeah, you need to create more than that and can't rely on the ref getting everything right, you need to do enough yourself.

But it wasn't 1 or 2. It was 4 penalties, nevermind anything else.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Rival Watch

by Nameless » 29 Dec 2020 12:17

Snowflake Royal
Nameless
Snowflake Royal They certainly are chances, if the opposition have to foul you or handle the ball to stop them.

Their keeper didn't make saves because every time we got near their box we were fouled.


I would suggest a large proportion of penalties were not ‘chances’.
The Norwich pen was not a chance, neither was the one Luton should have had.

What's Norwich or Luton got to do with it?


The discussion about whether every penalty decision tied in with a ‘chance’ isn’t just restricted to decisions at one end of the pitch surely ?
Not entirely clear what your exact point is as in one post you suggest the penalty itself is the ‘chance’, in another it seems you are referring to the incident that leads to the penalty.
Obviously a penalty kick is a ‘chance’ but it’s a bit wooly to stretch that to cover ‘th8ngs we as fans thought should be a penalty’.
An incident that leads to a penalty isn’t always a chance, awarding a pen often gives a team a chance they didn’t really deserve.


User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39391
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Rival Watch

by Snowflake Royal » 29 Dec 2020 12:36

Nameless
Snowflake Royal
Nameless
I would suggest a large proportion of penalties were not ‘chances’.
The Norwich pen was not a chance, neither was the one Luton should have had.

What's Norwich or Luton got to do with it?


The discussion about whether every penalty decision tied in with a ‘chance’ isn’t just restricted to decisions at one end of the pitch surely ?
Not entirely clear what your exact point is as in one post you suggest the penalty itself is the ‘chance’, in another it seems you are referring to the incident that leads to the penalty.
Obviously a penalty kick is a ‘chance’ but it’s a bit wooly to stretch that to cover ‘th8ngs we as fans thought should be a penalty’.
An incident that leads to a penalty isn’t always a chance, awarding a pen often gives a team a chance they didn’t really deserve.

That's not the discussion.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Rival Watch

by Nameless » 29 Dec 2020 12:46

Snowflake Royal
Nameless
Snowflake Royal What's Norwich or Luton got to do with it?


The discussion about whether every penalty decision tied in with a ‘chance’ isn’t just restricted to decisions at one end of the pitch surely ?
Not entirely clear what your exact point is as in one post you suggest the penalty itself is the ‘chance’, in another it seems you are referring to the incident that leads to the penalty.
Obviously a penalty kick is a ‘chance’ but it’s a bit wooly to stretch that to cover ‘th8ngs we as fans thought should be a penalty’.
An incident that leads to a penalty isn’t always a chance, awarding a pen often gives a team a chance they didn’t really deserve.

That's not the discussion.



We all know there is no ‘discussion’ ’ when you are involved, just a one way lecture...
Perhaps you could help by explain8ng what you want ‘the discussion’ to be and the acceptable points.
You wander around the topic on this one and it’s not easy to work out how you want us to proceed.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39391
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: Rival Watch

by Snowflake Royal » 29 Dec 2020 13:07

It's quite plain there to see and I'm not interested in going round in circles with you again Nameless.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Rival Watch

by Nameless » 29 Dec 2020 13:11

Snowflake Royal It's quite plain there to see and I'm not interested in going round in circles with you again Nameless.


And frankly when you are in this mood you aren’t worth engaging with. Luckily there are enough people on here’ who aren’t obsessed with points scoring and oneupmanship and actually enjoy a light hearted chat.


User avatar
bcubed
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11435
Joined: 30 Oct 2004 18:16
Location: Would do better with a stick of rhubarb

Re: Rival Watch

by bcubed » 29 Dec 2020 13:27

I’m seeing this -

We didn’t deserve to win because we didn’t create enough chances
Yes we did we should have had 4 penalties
Penalties given or not aren’t chances
Yes they are because without the foul we would have scored

FWIW I think we did more than enough to win and most independent observers think we should have had at least 2 penalties, maybe more.

So we can rightly feel robbed and justified in pointing to this game and that ref for our failure to get promoted !!

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Rival Watch

by Nameless » 29 Dec 2020 13:32

bcubed I’m seeing this -

We didn’t deserve to win because we didn’t create enough chances
Yes we did we should have had 4 penalties
Penalties given or not aren’t chances
Yes they are because without the foul we would have scored

FWIW I think we did more than enough to win and most independent observers think we should have had at least 2 penalties, maybe more.

So we can rightly feel robbed and justified in pointing to this game and that ref for our failure to get promoted !!


The 4th point is the weak one.
As I’ve said I reckon in general many penalties are given for things that weren’t chances. How that works for the 4 in question I don’t know.
I’ll blame Joao if we miss out by a point, even if he scores 30 goals. That missed pen against Birmingham was unforgivable....

Snowball
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 20679
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Rival Watch

by Snowball » 29 Dec 2020 14:09

Nameless
Snowflake Royal It's quite plain there to see and I'm not interested in going round in circles with you again Nameless.


And frankly when you are in this mood you aren’t worth engaging with. Luckily there are enough people on here’ who aren’t obsessed with points scoring and oneupmanship and actually enjoy a light hearted chat.




as long as the team is invested in point-scoring

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8851
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Rival Watch

by Nameless » 29 Dec 2020 14:33

Snowball
Nameless
Snowflake Royal It's quite plain there to see and I'm not interested in going round in circles with you again Nameless.


And frankly when you are in this mood you aren’t worth engaging with. Luckily there are enough people on here’ who aren’t obsessed with points scoring and oneupmanship and actually enjoy a light hearted chat.




as long as the team is invested in point-scoring


And we are part of the end of season three upmanship.....

SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6362
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: Rival Watch

by SCIAG » 29 Dec 2020 15:04

Nameless
bcubed I’m seeing this -

We didn’t deserve to win because we didn’t create enough chances
Yes we did we should have had 4 penalties
Penalties given or not aren’t chances
Yes they are because without the foul we would have scored

FWIW I think we did more than enough to win and most independent observers think we should have had at least 2 penalties, maybe more.

So we can rightly feel robbed and justified in pointing to this game and that ref for our failure to get promoted !!


The 4th point is the weak one.
As I’ve said I reckon in general many penalties are given for things that weren’t chances. How that works for the 4 in question I don’t know.
I’ll blame Joao if we miss out by a point, even if he scores 30 goals. That missed pen against Birmingham was unforgivable....

That’s the pertinent thing though isn’t it?

The handball is almost as clear cut as you can get, I almost think the punishment for those should be a penalty goal in the mould of rugby’s penalty tries. If they hadn’t cheated we would almost certain have scored, barring a wonder save.

Then there was a foul on Richards as he got in behind, a foul on Laurent in similar circumstances, and a kick on Baldock as he tried to control a high ball. I certainly don’t think we were likely to score from the Baldock one, and the Laurent one was middling, but Richards was one-on-one albeit from a narrow angle. We certainly created enough chances to score two goals only for the opposition’s cheating to cost us.

Highlights including the four appeals available here if you’re interested: https://youtube.com/watch?v=8mXWdVHtepc

The Royal Forester
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1464
Joined: 25 Dec 2015 13:53

Re: Rival Watch

by The Royal Forester » 29 Dec 2020 15:06

Why do most fans think that a penalty is a certain goal, when their team is denied one? Looking at it logically, if that first penalty had been given, the other incidents would not have happened. If the penalty had been awarded and resulted in a goal the game would have restarted from the halfway line, if missed the game may have restarted from a goalkick, or corner. As it was the game carried on from a different spot, therefore the whole pattern of play following the incident would have been different, if a penalty had been awarded. We could have won, lost or drew that match. No one can tell what the result would be, unless any questionable incidents, in any match, are the last actions of either half.

Mid Sussex Royal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3248
Joined: 02 Nov 2008 17:56

Re: Rival Watch

by Mid Sussex Royal » 29 Dec 2020 15:09

SouthDownsRoyal
URZZZZ Pulis gone from Wednesday


Interesting, after ten games.


Had an argument with the Chairman over non paid wages apparently

17149 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Jammy Dodger, Linden Jones' Tash, rabidbee, Snowflake Royal, Sutekh, windermereROYAL and 431 guests

It is currently 28 Mar 2024 11:39