Mostly decent, appreciative comments. There'll always be some entitled twats who can't see beyond the Prem. Spurs fans on the whole seem far more aware of the wider football world than the average Chelsea fan.
I'm glad they celebrated like they did. It was a compliment to both our performance and what the FA Cup still means to most fans. It was heartening to hear their manager saying after the game "now I understand what the FA Cup means" or words to that affect. It also pretty much mirrored how we felt after being pushed so close by Stourbridge.
@Wycombe85 said:
I'm glad they celebrated like they did. It was a compliment to both our performance and what the FA Cup still means to most fans. It was heartening to hear their manager saying after the game "now I understand what the FA Cup means" or words to that affect. It also pretty much mirrored how we felt after being pushed so close by Stourbridge.
@StrongestTeam he wasn't that bad - he won a deserved penalty and was nailed on to score at the end bar for a worldie save from Blackman to tip it over the crossbar. The player I was most disappointed in was Dier. For one of England's top prospects he really didn't impress - slow to and on the ball, limited range of passing, no passion or motivation as captain. Son, Sissoko, Dembele and Alli were all tremendous though.
@TTID what's the Irish connection with Spurs? Had a good time before and (not so much) after the match in the Bricklayers Arms. Seemed to be a lot of Irish Spurs fans in there.
@LX1 said:
TTID what's the Irish connection with Spurs? Had a good time before and (not so much) after the match in the Bricklayers Arms. Seemed to be a lot of Irish Spurs fans in there.
Danny Blanchflower
Pat Jennings
& to a lesser extent
Gerry Armstrong.
Nailed on penalty...the only response from me and around me was...why did Aaron do that? I think he'd gone too far to cross it properly anyway. Heigh ho!
@ Wendoverman Whilst I agree that it was a penalty, the inconsistency of the application of the laws continues to frustrate - yesterday a Sutton defender blatantly held off a Leeds winger, with his arm across him almost identical to Pierre's, and ran him away from the ball, but because it was 'shepherding the ball into touch' it was considered ok...
@LeedsBlue Big Aaron yanked him down no question...so ref had no choice. But reffing consistency in general...yep...preach it...as we will no doubt see in the weeks to come!
The ref did completely change at half time didn't he? Bayo was foul free in the first half and then got blown up every time after the break. Couldn't really argue about the penalty (was obstruction but that's still a penalty isn't it?) but the corner for the first goal was very dubious and the foul on the touchline just before the last goal was a really really soft one.
@BledlowBlue It was more than just 'getting in his way' - he had his arm up and across the chest of the striker. The ref indicated this clearly when pointing to the spot.
I also wondered about the obstruction/indirect free kick point but looked into it and the rules are different from what they used to be and if there's a foul in the box and there's actual contact, it's a penalty; there's almost no situation where there's a foul but no contact. Frustrating inconsistency generally from the ref though.
Having seen the penalty incident on TV afterwards I believe it was clearly an offence by Pierre. In real-time at the match, my position was square on to Pierre's right side and movement of his left arm was not visible: it looked very much as though Janssen had just run into Pierre's back and thrown himself to the floor.
@Bledlow_Blue From the FIFA Laws of the Game 2016/2017:
A direct free kick is awarded "if a player ... impedes an opponent with contact";
An indirect free kick is awarded "if a player ... impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made".
The referee deemed Pierre to have impeded his opponent with contact, hence a penalty kick was the correct decision.
Comments
Some delightful ungracious half wits on there, DOL! Most appreciated that a L2 team came and had a go, which made for a great advert the the FA Cup.
Negative comments were probably from sad little boys who didn't actually go to the game trying to be controversial.
Mostly decent, appreciative comments. There'll always be some entitled twats who can't see beyond the Prem. Spurs fans on the whole seem far more aware of the wider football world than the average Chelsea fan.
Hear hear to that last sentence!!
THFC Israel needs a slap.
Glad the gas room has no fans like that just looking to troll and whinge
On the whole spurs fans were very appreciative to wwfc ..just a few idiots as always.
Hear hear @StrongestTeam . They celebrated A win against a div 2 team in the 97th min!
I'm glad they celebrated like they did. It was a compliment to both our performance and what the FA Cup still means to most fans. It was heartening to hear their manager saying after the game "now I understand what the FA Cup means" or words to that affect. It also pretty much mirrored how we felt after being pushed so close by Stourbridge.
Excellent post.
@StrongestTeam he wasn't that bad - he won a deserved penalty and was nailed on to score at the end bar for a worldie save from Blackman to tip it over the crossbar. The player I was most disappointed in was Dier. For one of England's top prospects he really didn't impress - slow to and on the ball, limited range of passing, no passion or motivation as captain. Son, Sissoko, Dembele and Alli were all tremendous though.
Nailed on pen though? Or is it my rose tinted specs?
@TTID what's the Irish connection with Spurs? Had a good time before and (not so much) after the match in the Bricklayers Arms. Seemed to be a lot of Irish Spurs fans in there.
Nailed on penalty for me as well.Dont think any wwfc fans around me complained either.
Danny Blanchflower
Pat Jennings
& to a lesser extent
Gerry Armstrong.
@StrongestTeam a very profound answer!
I thought Janssen was decent when he came on. Got the pen, drew a worldie out of the keeper and played a lovely one-two with Son for the winner.
Also i think some forget CCV is still only 19.
Nailed on penalty...the only response from me and around me was...why did Aaron do that? I think he'd gone too far to cross it properly anyway. Heigh ho!
@ Wendoverman Whilst I agree that it was a penalty, the inconsistency of the application of the laws continues to frustrate - yesterday a Sutton defender blatantly held off a Leeds winger, with his arm across him almost identical to Pierre's, and ran him away from the ball, but because it was 'shepherding the ball into touch' it was considered ok...
@LeedsBlue Big Aaron yanked him down no question...so ref had no choice. But reffing consistency in general...yep...preach it...as we will no doubt see in the weeks to come!
Wasn't it obstruction? Therefore an indirect free-kick
Also the corner which led to the first goal should never have been a corner
The ref did completely change at half time didn't he? Bayo was foul free in the first half and then got blown up every time after the break. Couldn't really argue about the penalty (was obstruction but that's still a penalty isn't it?) but the corner for the first goal was very dubious and the foul on the touchline just before the last goal was a really really soft one.
@BledlowBlue It was more than just 'getting in his way' - he had his arm up and across the chest of the striker. The ref indicated this clearly when pointing to the spot.
@Bledlow_Blue @Right_in_the_Middle Agreed about the corner for the first goal.
I also wondered about the obstruction/indirect free kick point but looked into it and the rules are different from what they used to be and if there's a foul in the box and there's actual contact, it's a penalty; there's almost no situation where there's a foul but no contact. Frustrating inconsistency generally from the ref though.
Having seen the penalty incident on TV afterwards I believe it was clearly an offence by Pierre. In real-time at the match, my position was square on to Pierre's right side and movement of his left arm was not visible: it looked very much as though Janssen had just run into Pierre's back and thrown himself to the floor.
@Bledlow_Blue From the FIFA Laws of the Game 2016/2017:
The referee deemed Pierre to have impeded his opponent with contact, hence a penalty kick was the correct decision.
It's very amusing reading the Spurs comments before the match...2 - 0 at half-time must have been a bit of a shock for some of them!
obstruction in the area is a free kick, but that was borderline assault by Pierre similar to what he did to Hylton the week previous.
Not even remotely similar.Get your eyes seen to.
Have to agree there @LeedsBlue ..I was very surprised a foul wasn't given.