BFTG Norwich

User avatar
Jagermesiter1871
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3098
Joined: 25 Jul 2010 01:59

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Jagermesiter1871 » 17 Dec 2020 11:00

Zammo Forgot to add, I have no idea why Aluko was hooked off so early.

AND

Semedo is not a footballer.


Think thats harsh on Semedo - he's not a lone striker or wherever he was played as last night and where he's been played since being here. He's a half decent footballer but I personally wouldn't be playing him as much as Pauno is. He seems to see him as a real utility player - I think he's far more limited.

South Coast Royal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2405
Joined: 16 Jan 2020 17:29

Re: BFTG Norwich

by South Coast Royal » 17 Dec 2020 11:03

On a positive note we have played most of the top sides and are in 5th spot.

On a negative note we might struggle against some lesser sides in the coming weeks,Luton , Huddersfield, Coventry and Preston (both of whom we have already lost against when putting out our first eleven) unless the walking wounded return and/or we make a couple of signings of players good enough to come straight into the side.

Apart from games against the above we also have to play Brentford twice, Swansea and Bournemouth so we do really need to be stronger and not have to use Aluko, Baldock and Esteves, none of whom unfortunately bring enough to the team.

Their first goal last night had nothing to do with the injuries, it was yet another punished unforced error and Norwich had already come close after our normal (of late) slow start.
We really do need to find a safer way of playing out from the back-our defensive players and keeper are not great on the ball so if we keep on doing it we will continue to give goals away.

I should think Jason Tindall was laughing to himself in the studio when we cocked up-he knows that if our defence is pressed they will concede-and that's when we actually already have the ball!!

There was little that the manager could do last night taking into account the personnel and presumably on Saturday it will be the same on Saturday-run about a lot and hope for the best.

Maybe with goal kicks we will start to go long-it's far less dangerous giving the ball away in the opposition half than it is in and around our box-after all, what tends to happen is that we fiddle around for a while and then Morrison or Moore still hits the ball long and we lose possession having run the risk already of giving it away close to our own goal.
So, from a safety aspect let the keeper hit the ball long.

Norfolk Royal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3244
Joined: 30 Apr 2004 16:07
Location: Carrot juice is the elixir of the Gods.

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Norfolk Royal » 17 Dec 2020 11:09

SCIAG
Norfolk Royal Agree with most other comments. Given the personnel we had available that was about the best we could do.

The obvious problem without Joao and Meite was that we did not occupy Norwich's back four allowing them to push up and press us high which led to the first goal.

VAR may have ruled out their pen but we would have wanted it at the other end so swings and roundabouts on that one.

I find it shocking that we do not possess a single full back in the squad deemed good enough to deputise for either Richards or Yiadom, a big problem which must be addressed in January. I thought before the game that Arrons would get joy on the right for Norwich as he is a top young player who likes to attack and is quick. So it proved.

The difference between the squads was illustrated when Norwich brought Cantwell and Hugill off the bench, two players who would be first choice in any other championship team with the possible exception of Bournemouth.

Love to see young players getting a chance but bit too much last night. I really hope Jayden Onen does well and has a good career but you can imagine the call he had with his mum last night.

Jayden: 'Hi mum, I played for the first team tonight for the first time ever.'

Mum: 'That's fantastic, I'm so proud of you. How did you get on?'

Jayden: 'I got booked by the referee before I touched the ball.'

Mum: 'Oh.'

Araruna looked like a useful deputy for Yiadom, good delivery. And Holmes has largely done well, while neither Gibson nor Esteves have been disastrous. Three or four specialists seems about normal?


Esteves wasn't chosen last night, neither Holmes or Gibson are full backs, and Araruna was billed as a defensive midfielder when he joined. So as it stands we don't have a specialist in the squad in full back position deemed good enough for the first team, as I said.

Westwood52
Member
Posts: 914
Joined: 08 Oct 2010 16:46

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Westwood52 » 17 Dec 2020 11:53

We were down to the bare bones last night and it showed.Norwich cleverly played around Rino and Laurent,and attacked our novice FBs.That said if it hadn’t been for the plonker officiating we would have escaped with a draw.
IMHO

Rafa 8 I disagree with some comments,he pulled off two top class saves from point blank range.Easily our best player.

Holmes 5 It wasn’t all bad and he was actually reasonable going forward.The coaching team need to work on his positioning.
Gibson 4 Started ok ,then got rinsed.
Morrison 6 Not too much wrong,but not up against a CF.
Moore 5 Very mixed,performance ,got lulled into the dive.
Rino 4 Marked him down for that stupid pass.
Laurent 6 Had a very difficult game and his lack of mobility was exposed.
Olise 7 Some poor judgement at times,but clearly our only creative spark.
Ejaria 6 Normal service really.Looks dangerous but no end product.
Semedo 4 Feel sorry for him .We had to play him totally out of position.
Alukho 6 There is always that threat of a match winner.Should have been left on.

Estevez and Baldock Oh dear.
Ondine Very unlucky with the booking.The Ref clearly thought it was about time I booked someone,anyone.

Hey again a very poor ref.To give him the benefit of the doubt he might have thought there was a slight touch on the pen However the dive was a give away.The foul on Ejaria on the edge of the box was a much clearer foul by Norwich.How did Pukki get away with no booking? Also McLean ? I really give up on these guys.Never mind Keith Stroud on Saturday.Wince.

Royal_jimmy
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1591
Joined: 10 Aug 2011 10:44
Location: Y26

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Royal_jimmy » 17 Dec 2020 12:17

We did as well as we could given the players we had available. Our current run of injuries is absolutely disgusting and I doubt another side in the league has had as many forwards out as we've had.

On the game, I couldn't fault the effort of the players last night but we were just so blunt, lacked any penetration at all which was no surprise given we had a false number 9. I was lucky to be one of the 2,000 there and I thought the first half was pretty even. Second half Farke's tactical change won them that in my opinion. The penalty was clumsy, probably a fair result even though it wasn't a penalty.

We had a lot of the ball, we just couldn't get into those dangerous positions enough. Like another poster said, maybe we should have tried winning more set pieces. Maybe something we can try at Brentford on Saturday.

Ratings:
Rafael - 8
Holmes - 7
Moore - 6
Morrison - 6
Gibson - 6
Rinomhota - 5
Laurent - 8
Semedo - 5
Ejaria - 6
Olise - 7
Aluko - 6

Subs:
Baldock - 5
McIntyre - 6
Onen - 6
Esteves - 5


SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5420
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: BFTG Norwich

by SCIAG » 17 Dec 2020 12:42

Norfolk Royal
SCIAG
Norfolk Royal Agree with most other comments. Given the personnel we had available that was about the best we could do.

The obvious problem without Joao and Meite was that we did not occupy Norwich's back four allowing them to push up and press us high which led to the first goal.

VAR may have ruled out their pen but we would have wanted it at the other end so swings and roundabouts on that one.

I find it shocking that we do not possess a single full back in the squad deemed good enough to deputise for either Richards or Yiadom, a big problem which must be addressed in January. I thought before the game that Arrons would get joy on the right for Norwich as he is a top young player who likes to attack and is quick. So it proved.

The difference between the squads was illustrated when Norwich brought Cantwell and Hugill off the bench, two players who would be first choice in any other championship team with the possible exception of Bournemouth.

Love to see young players getting a chance but bit too much last night. I really hope Jayden Onen does well and has a good career but you can imagine the call he had with his mum last night.

Jayden: 'Hi mum, I played for the first team tonight for the first time ever.'

Mum: 'That's fantastic, I'm so proud of you. How did you get on?'

Jayden: 'I got booked by the referee before I touched the ball.'

Mum: 'Oh.'

Araruna looked like a useful deputy for Yiadom, good delivery. And Holmes has largely done well, while neither Gibson nor Esteves have been disastrous. Three or four specialists seems about normal?


Esteves wasn't chosen last night, neither Holmes or Gibson are full backs, and Araruna was billed as a defensive midfielder when he joined. So as it stands we don't have a specialist in the squad in full back position deemed good enough for the first team, as I said.

When we signed Araruna, Bowen described him as “a really bright, young talent who can play in two or three different positions…right-back, on the right side of midfield and as a defensive central midfielder.” At this point I think it’s fair to count him as a full back.

Similarly, Gibson was signed as fifth-choice centre back and second choice left back.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 19747
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Snowflake Royal » 17 Dec 2020 12:48

Norfolk Royal
SCIAG
Norfolk Royal Agree with most other comments. Given the personnel we had available that was about the best we could do.

The obvious problem without Joao and Meite was that we did not occupy Norwich's back four allowing them to push up and press us high which led to the first goal.

VAR may have ruled out their pen but we would have wanted it at the other end so swings and roundabouts on that one.

I find it shocking that we do not possess a single full back in the squad deemed good enough to deputise for either Richards or Yiadom, a big problem which must be addressed in January. I thought before the game that Arrons would get joy on the right for Norwich as he is a top young player who likes to attack and is quick. So it proved.

The difference between the squads was illustrated when Norwich brought Cantwell and Hugill off the bench, two players who would be first choice in any other championship team with the possible exception of Bournemouth.

Love to see young players getting a chance but bit too much last night. I really hope Jayden Onen does well and has a good career but you can imagine the call he had with his mum last night.

Jayden: 'Hi mum, I played for the first team tonight for the first time ever.'

Mum: 'That's fantastic, I'm so proud of you. How did you get on?'

Jayden: 'I got booked by the referee before I touched the ball.'

Mum: 'Oh.'

Araruna looked like a useful deputy for Yiadom, good delivery. And Holmes has largely done well, while neither Gibson nor Esteves have been disastrous. Three or four specialists seems about normal?


Esteves wasn't chosen last night, neither Holmes or Gibson are full backs, and Araruna was billed as a defensive midfielder when he joined. So as it stands we don't have a specialist in the squad in full back position deemed good enough for the first team, as I said.

That's a bafflingly one sided look at it.

Araruna came as a midfielder who could play RB and has since made virtually all his appearances at RB and looked good there.

Holmes, the odd mistake aside, has done really well. Gibson, the odd mistake aside has done well too and we brought him in primarily as LB cover (hence McIntyre getting the nod at CB ahead of him initially when Moore was out).

We have no dedicated fullback cover beyond Esteves, precisely because we have such good utility options to come in there if needed.

In fact our one dedicated fullback cover has probably been our worst player at fullback this season.

Hound
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 18243
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Hound » 17 Dec 2020 13:19

South Coast Royal Maybe with goal kicks we will start to go long-it's far less dangerous giving the ball away in the opposition half than it is in and around our box-after all, what tends to happen is that we fiddle around for a while and then Morrison or Moore still hits the ball long and we lose possession having run the risk already of giving it away close to our own goal.
So, from a safety aspect let the keeper hit the ball long.


Think this is where I disagree. You hoof the ball up field towards Baldock, and they hammer a header back at our defence - thats more dangerous than us keeping possession imo.

You can play a longer ball game if you genuinely have players who will win the ball and hold it up - Joao can sometimes, but otherwise you are likely just giving the ball back to the oppo, and often in our own half.

I dont think either of the CBs lost possession often tbh. They actually hit some nice long balls as well, from a position between our box and the centre circle - as a result of passing it out.

Norfolk Royal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3244
Joined: 30 Apr 2004 16:07
Location: Carrot juice is the elixir of the Gods.

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Norfolk Royal » 17 Dec 2020 13:36

Snowflake Royal
Norfolk Royal
SCIAG Araruna looked like a useful deputy for Yiadom, good delivery. And Holmes has largely done well, while neither Gibson nor Esteves have been disastrous. Three or four specialists seems about normal?


Esteves wasn't chosen last night, neither Holmes or Gibson are full backs, and Araruna was billed as a defensive midfielder when he joined. So as it stands we don't have a specialist in the squad in full back position deemed good enough for the first team, as I said.

That's a bafflingly one sided look at it.

Araruna came as a midfielder who could play RB and has since made virtually all his appearances at RB and looked good there.

Holmes, the odd mistake aside, has done really well. Gibson, the odd mistake aside has done well too and we brought him in primarily as LB cover (hence McIntyre getting the nod at CB ahead of him initially when Moore was out).

We have no dedicated fullback cover beyond Esteves, precisely because we have such good utility options to come in there if needed.

In fact our one dedicated fullback cover has probably been our worst player at fullback this season.


And that's a bafflingly rose tinted spectacles look at it while ignoring the realities of the situation.


User avatar
Sutekh
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11035
Joined: 12 Feb 2014 14:05
Location: Undiscovered pyramid somewhere in Egypt

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Sutekh » 17 Dec 2020 13:55

Reading changed tactically by not playing a striker in an effort to flood the midfield space and stop Norwich playing effectively. Unfortunately Reading then proceeded to spent too much time in the early stages fart arsing about playing crab-ball in dangerous places culminating in Rino’s stupidly misplaced pass.

After that they grew more into the game and being more effective with the flooded midfield and pretty much gave as good as they got. Norwich look very good going forward but aren’t overly anything special at the back but the lack of Joao and Meite meant there wasn’t really a lot with which to ruffle Norwich’s defence.

Ref wasn’t as bad as some but wasn’t brilliant either, really should have booked Pukki for his continual foul play. The penalty was just one of those things, you’ve seen them given before and they’ll be given again. If had been the other way round most of us would probably have argued it was justified.

Reading just seemed to tire as the second half wore on and not having any real options on the bench to change things didn’t help that.

Laurent motm. Rafael did well with some class saves. Overall not too bad a performance considering the number of key players that are missing.

South Coast Royal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2405
Joined: 16 Jan 2020 17:29

Re: BFTG Norwich

by South Coast Royal » 17 Dec 2020 16:16

Hound
South Coast Royal Maybe with goal kicks we will start to go long-it's far less dangerous giving the ball away in the opposition half than it is in and around our box-after all, what tends to happen is that we fiddle around for a while and then Morrison or Moore still hits the ball long and we lose possession having run the risk already of giving it away close to our own goal.
So, from a safety aspect let the keeper hit the ball long.


Think this is where I disagree. You hoof the ball up field towards Baldock, and they hammer a header back at our defence - thats more dangerous than us keeping possession imo.

You can play a longer ball game if you genuinely have players who will win the ball and hold it up - Joao can sometimes, but otherwise you are likely just giving the ball back to the oppo, and often in our own half.

I dont think either of the CBs lost possession often tbh. They actually hit some nice long balls as well, from a position between our box and the centre circle - as a result of passing it out.


In principle I agree with you but in practice we are dodgy as per last night, other square passes in previous games and the keeper's aberration at Bournemouth.
What I would like to see much more is Laurent and Rino picking up the ball and moving forward quickly and for the whole defence not to be so negative -Rino got into trouble by having negative thoughts.

Hound
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 18243
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Hound » 17 Dec 2020 16:20

South Coast Royal
Hound
South Coast Royal Maybe with goal kicks we will start to go long-it's far less dangerous giving the ball away in the opposition half than it is in and around our box-after all, what tends to happen is that we fiddle around for a while and then Morrison or Moore still hits the ball long and we lose possession having run the risk already of giving it away close to our own goal.
So, from a safety aspect let the keeper hit the ball long.


Think this is where I disagree. You hoof the ball up field towards Baldock, and they hammer a header back at our defence - thats more dangerous than us keeping possession imo.

You can play a longer ball game if you genuinely have players who will win the ball and hold it up - Joao can sometimes, but otherwise you are likely just giving the ball back to the oppo, and often in our own half.

I dont think either of the CBs lost possession often tbh. They actually hit some nice long balls as well, from a position between our box and the centre circle - as a result of passing it out.


In principle I agree with you but in practice we are dodgy as per last night, other square passes in previous games and the keeper's aberration at Bournemouth.
What I would like to see much more is Laurent and Rino picking up the ball and moving forward quickly and for the whole defence not to be so negative -Rino got into trouble by having negative thoughts.


yep agreed. Too often the first thought is to go back - thats what needs to change. One of those things when trying to be risk adverse actually causes you more problems. The one last night was a really poor example - Holmes played a poor pass too short into Rino which gave him no option to go forward. Rino then looked to go back again, the pass wasn't really there, and he did some half hearted nonsense pass.

Pick the ball up short and always look to go forward unless you have to go back to retain possession. Interesting to hear L Moore shout - he nearly always encourages just that. Players just need the confidence to do it.

User avatar
Zip
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13928
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Zip » 17 Dec 2020 16:59

We really are very unlucky with the injuries. It’s bad enough being without any of our strikers but to lose our first choice full backs too is a killer. Gibson’s inexperience hurt us last night. He was badly exposed on two occasions. We got away with it the first time but paid for it with the penalty on the second occasion.


User avatar
RoyalBlue
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 10726
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:39
Location: Developed a pathological hatred of snakes on 14/10/19

Re: BFTG Norwich

by RoyalBlue » 17 Dec 2020 17:10

Stranded
RoyalBlue
SCIAG I don’t see why the Norwich player would dive when he had a clear shot on goal. If you’re being generous then maybe he slipped, but it’s hard to argue that Moore didn’t cause the slip. T


Watch the replays, particularly the one behind the goal which shows that he clearly launches himself into the air. Why did he do that rather than shoot? Because he had taken a poor touch and was struggling to get the ball back under control in time. Also Rafael was well positioned.


To play devil's advocate and mentioned elsewhere - there were few complaints from the team and Moore could be clearly seen on one close up saying "Sorry boys" as they set up for the penalty. He knew he had screwed up.


Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.

Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.

User avatar
Zip
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13928
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Zip » 17 Dec 2020 17:16

RoyalBlue
Stranded
RoyalBlue
Watch the replays, particularly the one behind the goal which shows that he clearly launches himself into the air. Why did he do that rather than shoot? Because he had taken a poor touch and was struggling to get the ball back under control in time. Also Rafael was well positioned.


To play devil's advocate and mentioned elsewhere - there were few complaints from the team and Moore could be clearly seen on one close up saying "Sorry boys" as they set up for the penalty. He knew he had screwed up.


Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.

Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.


Yep he stays down clutching his shin and appearing to be in agony. Blatant cheating. He should have been carded. Very frustrating. Luck has not been on our side over the past few.

WestYorksRoyal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1798
Joined: 15 Apr 2019 19:16

Re: BFTG Norwich

by WestYorksRoyal » 17 Dec 2020 17:36

RoyalBlue
Stranded
RoyalBlue
Watch the replays, particularly the one behind the goal which shows that he clearly launches himself into the air. Why did he do that rather than shoot? Because he had taken a poor touch and was struggling to get the ball back under control in time. Also Rafael was well positioned.


To play devil's advocate and mentioned elsewhere - there were few complaints from the team and Moore could be clearly seen on one close up saying "Sorry boys" as they set up for the penalty. He knew he had screwed up.


Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.

Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.

Can they still suspend players for "successful deception of the referee"?

User avatar
Lower West
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 4007
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 11:35
Location: Somewhere in the UK

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Lower West » 17 Dec 2020 17:41

Jagermesiter1871
Zammo Forgot to add, I have no idea why Aluko was hooked off so early.

AND

Semedo is not a footballer.


Think thats harsh on Semedo - he's not a lone striker or wherever he was played as last night and where he's been played since being here. He's a half decent footballer but I personally wouldn't be playing him as much as Pauno is. He seems to see him as a real utility player - I think he's far more limited.


Rather like Alkuo I'm struggling to justify his inclusion in the team. All round contribution is lacking. Nor does he seem to command a settled playing position within the formation.

User avatar
Zip
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13928
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Zip » 17 Dec 2020 18:05

Lower West
Jagermesiter1871
Zammo Forgot to add, I have no idea why Aluko was hooked off so early.

AND

Semedo is not a footballer.


Think thats harsh on Semedo - he's not a lone striker or wherever he was played as last night and where he's been played since being here. He's a half decent footballer but I personally wouldn't be playing him as much as Pauno is. He seems to see him as a real utility player - I think he's far more limited.


Rather like Alkuo I'm struggling to justify his inclusion in the team. All round contribution is lacking. Nor does he seem to command a settled playing position within the formation.


In fairness to Semedo he is being played all over the pitch. Not helping him settle.I see him as a bench option when the injuries ease.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 19747
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Snowflake Royal » 17 Dec 2020 23:14

Zip
RoyalBlue
Stranded
To play devil's advocate and mentioned elsewhere - there were few complaints from the team and Moore could be clearly seen on one close up saying "Sorry boys" as they set up for the penalty. He knew he had screwed up.


Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.

Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.


Yep he stays down clutching his shin and appearing to be in agony. Blatant cheating. He should have been carded. Very frustrating. Luck has not been on our side over the past few.

Players have been doing that for decades with or without contact. And the useless refs do nothing to stop it and plenty to encourage it

See plenty of fouls not given because a player stays on their feet even though they've been impeded.

The refs make it so you've got to play act to get a decision half the time

User avatar
Zip
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13928
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: BFTG Norwich

by Zip » 17 Dec 2020 23:50

Snowflake Royal
Zip
RoyalBlue
Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.

Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.


Yep he stays down clutching his shin and appearing to be in agony. Blatant cheating. He should have been carded. Very frustrating. Luck has not been on our side over the past few.

Players have been doing that for decades with or without contact. And the useless refs do nothing to stop it and plenty to encourage it

See plenty of fouls not given because a player stays on their feet even though they've been impeded.

The refs make it so you've got to play act to get a decision half the time


The authorities need to do a lot more here. There needs to be far more retrospective action taken.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests

It is currently 19 Apr 2021 19:32