BTFG Rrro-therrr-hhaaam

[Horsham Royal]

Because the skill to get them on target and in from that distance is high. And they look spectacular.

Yes your xG pricks will bemoan them but as Ian said it takes a lot of skill and technique to hit them on target with enough power, they’re not as “speculative” as people would like to think and they score worldies in training all the time but replicating that in a real game is completely different. Ditto they look outrageous. That being said love a good team goal. Wilshere against Norwich was a beaut if you remember it. I always think of a lovely goal Vydra scored against Brentford I think which was great as well, Beeren’s from Gunter’s cross etc etc.

Just love a nice goal, but we could score 100 scrappy goals a season and I wouldn’t complain.

The speculative ones don't go in IMO.

It's like saying Meite's bicycle kick isn't that good because it's speculative. Most attempts don't really threaten the goal afterall. Completely ignores that getting it right and scoring with it is hard

Not denying the skill. But imo, 3 or 4 players getting it right collectively and scoring is equally or more difficult.
As I said, each to their own.

[Hound]

That Esteves effort takes all sort of ability. The Meite goal was a cracker, but it’s the sort you could pull off once in a very long while playing 5 aside (well maybe a few years ago). No way with that Esteves shot

[SouthDownsRoyal]

That Esteves effort takes all sort of ability. The Meite goal was a cracker, but it’s the sort you could pull off once in a very long while playing 5 aside (well maybe a few years ago). No way with that Esteves shot

True but one went in and one didn’t

[NewCorkSeth]

That Esteves effort takes all sort of ability. The Meite goal was a cracker, but it’s the sort you could pull off once in a very long while playing 5 aside (well maybe a few years ago). No way with that Esteves shot

Agreed. Lots of players can do what Meite did (not to downplay it. Sensational goal) but I reckon a lot fewer can take a shot like that Esteves one.

[Millsy]

Semedo was poor, blowing out of his arse after 70 mins but did cover a lot of ground. It was also noticeable he was swapped with Ovie positionally at half time and played deeper and wider.

just not-yet-fit IMO

I hope that's it, but of the four shit passes I counted I'm sure they weren't all after 70mins.

It's too early to tell of course, I'm sure with fitness and experience he'll improve.

[WestYorksRoyal]

Can anyone explain why there was no card for Joao's penalty? He had beaten the defenders, had a chance of beating the keeper and was rugby tackled from behind. In the context of the game it wasn't important at all; was the ref just allowing himself to apply leniency because of that? I wouldn’t disagree with that as such, but I thought ref's should be consistent.

[NewCorkSeth]

Can anyone explain why there was no card for Joao's penalty? He had beaten the defenders, had a chance of beating the keeper and was rugby tackled from behind. In the context of the game it wasn't important at all; was the ref just allowing himself to apply leniency because of that? I wouldn’t disagree with that as such, but I thought ref's should be consistent.

He got a yellow..

[Franchise FC]

Can anyone explain why there was no card for Joao's penalty? He had beaten the defenders, had a chance of beating the keeper and was rugby tackled from behind. In the context of the game it wasn't important at all; was the ref just allowing himself to apply leniency because of that? I wouldn’t disagree with that as such, but I thought ref's should be consistent.

He got a yellow..

I'm not at all convinced that the ref knew which of the two had brought Joao down.

And I thought the 'new' rule was that a penalty when denying a goalscoring opportunity was only a yellow if there was a genuine attempt to play the ball

[tidus_mi2]

Can anyone explain why there was no card for Joao's penalty? He had beaten the defenders, had a chance of beating the keeper and was rugby tackled from behind. In the context of the game it wasn't important at all; was the ref just allowing himself to apply leniency because of that? I wouldn’t disagree with that as such, but I thought ref's should be consistent.

He got a yellow..

I'm not at all convinced that the ref knew which of the two had brought Joao down.

And I thought the 'new' rule was that a penalty when denying a goalscoring opportunity was only a yellow if there was a genuine attempt to play the ball

That's correct so I think the Rotherham player was lucky to not get a red, context of the game it wouldn't have made a difference, Sheffield Wednesday might feel aggrieved if Ihiekwe has a top performance on Wednesday.

[Franchise FC]

He got a yellow..

I'm not at all convinced that the ref knew which of the two had brought Joao down.

And I thought the 'new' rule was that a penalty when denying a goalscoring opportunity was only a yellow if there was a genuine attempt to play the ball

That's correct so I think the Rotherham player was lucky to not get a red, context of the game it wouldn't have made a difference, Sheffield Wednesday might feel aggrieved if Ihiekwe has a top performance on Wednesday.

Maybe the ref thought that the rugby tackle couldn't be a red because the covering defender would have been able to bring him down if the first one missed

[Hound]

Can anyone explain why there was no card for Joao's penalty? He had beaten the defenders, had a chance of beating the keeper and was rugby tackled from behind. In the context of the game it wasn't important at all; was the ref just allowing himself to apply leniency because of that? I wouldn’t disagree with that as such, but I thought ref's should be consistent.

Yeah was a red but at that stage don’t think anyone could be arsed to argue

[Snowflake Royal]

Can anyone explain why there was no card for Joao's penalty? He had beaten the defenders, had a chance of beating the keeper and was rugby tackled from behind. In the context of the game it wasn't important at all; was the ref just allowing himself to apply leniency because of that? I wouldn’t disagree with that as such, but I thought ref's should be consistent.

I think Ref can only think it was
A) a legitimate attempt to play the ball, which means no red card
B) Not a clear goalscoring opportunity

Personally I think it was
C) a combination of pity and not having to send two players off for one foul or worry about explaining which one was more responsible.

Paul's opinion would be useful, if maybe a little out of date.

[NewCorkSeth]

More importantly how many penalties will Joao win this season simply by being too strong to stop when he gets in that position?

The long ball to Joao is already proven to work very well due to his close control. If the dont take him down he scores a decent number of those chances.

[Old Man Andrews]

Can anyone explain why there was no card for Joao's penalty? He had beaten the defenders, had a chance of beating the keeper and was rugby tackled from behind. In the context of the game it wasn't important at all; was the ref just allowing himself to apply leniency because of that? I wouldn’t disagree with that as such, but I thought ref's should be consistent.

I think Ref can only think it was
A) a legitimate attempt to play the ball, which means no red card
B) Not a clear goalscoring opportunity

Personally I think it was
C) a combination of pity and not having to send two players off for one foul or worry about explaining which one was more responsible.

Paul's opinion would be useful, if maybe a little out of date.

I think if that foul happens in the 10th minute at 0-0 the ref gives a red or yellow card. The game was over when Joao won the penalty so the ref showed some leniency imo. That shouldn't be the case though and the ref would have been marked down for it hopefully.

[Millsy]

I'd much rather win 3-0 against a full side than against 10 men.

Yeah I know it'd have only been the last few mins but when people glance at scores they're not going to look into it too much and that little red card makes you think "oh ok so that's why they won."

At the moment it looks like we're taking the division by storm and I want opposition to be shit scared of us.

[bcubed]

I'd much rather win 3-0 against a full side than against 10 men.

Yeah I know it'd have only been the last few mins but when people glance at scores they're not going to look into it too much and that little red card makes you think "oh ok so that's why they won."

At the moment it looks like we're taking the division by storm and I want opposition to be shit scared of us.

I think I'd prefer that they think we're fluking it somehow and they underestimate us

[Snowflake Royal]

I'd much rather win 3-0 against a full side than against 10 men.

Yeah I know it'd have only been the last few mins but when people glance at scores they're not going to look into it too much and that little red card makes you think "oh ok so that's why they won."

At the moment it looks like we're taking the division by storm and I want opposition to be shit scared of us.

I think I'd prefer that they think we're fluking it somehow and they underestimate us

Yep.

Shit scared means park the bus. Complacent means open game.

[Stranded]

I'd much rather win 3-0 against a full side than against 10 men.

Yeah I know it'd have only been the last few mins but when people glance at scores they're not going to look into it too much and that little red card makes you think "oh ok so that's why they won."

At the moment it looks like we're taking the division by storm and I want opposition to be shit scared of us.

Yet people go on about Blackburn being a massive threat tonight despite 6 of their goals coming against 10 men and them failing to score in their last 2 home games.

[Millsy]

I'd much rather win 3-0 against a full side than against 10 men.

Yeah I know it'd have only been the last few mins but when people glance at scores they're not going to look into it too much and that little red card makes you think "oh ok so that's why they won."

At the moment it looks like we're taking the division by storm and I want opposition to be shit scared of us.

I think I'd prefer that they think we're fluking it somehow and they underestimate us

Yep.

Shit scared means park the bus. Complacent means open game.

Yeah I was wondering this as I typed it.

But we see how well being scared of us has worked out thus far in the last couple of games: high press, scrappy, tire themselves out, we soak it up and then beat them.

But yeah perhaps we do want to go under the radar a bit and hope people think we've just been lucky.

[Pepe the Horseman]

I'd much rather win 3-0 against a full side than against 10 men.

Yeah I know it'd have only been the last few mins but when people glance at scores they're not going to look into it too much and that little red card makes you think "oh ok so that's why they won."

At the moment it looks like we're taking the division by storm and I want opposition to be shit scared of us.

Yet people go on about Blackburn being a massive threat tonight despite 6 of their goals coming against 10 men and them failing to score in their last 2 home games.

One of which was also against ten men.