@eric_plant said:
Don't give up on this season, I'm sure the manager and players haven't.
.........
We've got a run of good results in us and it's all to play for. All this talk of being in a good position for league 1 next season is a bit defeatist if you ask me, and the exact opposite of the mindset that have brought us to where we are today.
the ..... is more that @eric plant said which I agree with. Apologies to @eric_plant if selective quoting gives offence
I wanted to echo and add to the point that Gareth and the players haven't given up and hadn't given up when the team ran out onto the field at Torquay.
Circumstances make some games are hard and circumstances make some games easier.
Yesterday; we had serious defensive players missing; the game plan was disrupted by the warm-up injury to Pattison; some players could have still been in post covid recovery and we were blessed with a referee who seemed to think that because Wycombe were level with Brentford at half time Wycombe must be cheating.
We tried to turn round what became a very difficult situation after the absurd penalty, we didn't go for damage limitation.
In the future there will be other games which will be easier and we will win some of them. Maybe we will win enough.
Games and seasons can have turning points. I think it more likely that we will stay up than I will ever witness another referee give a penalty in a situation like yesterdays.
@glasshalffull said:
Anyone (well, the one person) who thinks the penalty was justified should look at the angle from behind the goal which clearly shows Onyedinma clear the ball before the Brentford player runs across him and ‘falls’ over.
By dithering on the ball in his own box Fred gave the opportunity to the opponent to close him down. The opponent got to the ball first but made a pretty poor connection with the ball before Fred hacked it clear. As Fred cleared the ball his striking leg then naturally followed through and the Brentford player ran into it.
If the ball had just be cleared promptly this situation would never have arisen. It’s not a stone wall decision at all but I’ve seen similar penalties given numerous times before.
The bottom line is it was totally avoidable by getting rid of the ball early and not dithering, for me it was a typical attacking player in his own box and the clumsyness of it.
Dithering on the ball is not an offence punishable by the award of a penalty and by your own description Fred cleared the ball with his striking leg before the Brentford player ‘ran into it.’ How on earth does that constitute a foul? I have watched literally thousands of games in my time and I have never seen a penalty given for a situation like yesterday’s. You say that you have, so I would genuinely be interested to see one of the numerous examples to which you refer.
Dithering on the ball is not an offence but it gave opportunity for a coming together like that to happen.
Straight off the top of my head, Van Dyk on Lamela here at 02:09, defender goes to clear the ball while the attacker comes in on the blindside. More contact in this instance but very similar incident.
@glasshalffull said:
Anyone (well, the one person) who thinks the penalty was justified should look at the angle from behind the goal which clearly shows Onyedinma clear the ball before the Brentford player runs across him and ‘falls’ over.
By dithering on the ball in his own box Fred gave the opportunity to the opponent to close him down. The opponent got to the ball first but made a pretty poor connection with the ball before Fred hacked it clear. As Fred cleared the ball his striking leg then naturally followed through and the Brentford player ran into it.
If the ball had just be cleared promptly this situation would never have arisen. It’s not a stone wall decision at all but I’ve seen similar penalties given numerous times before.
The bottom line is it was totally avoidable by getting rid of the ball early and not dithering, for me it was a typical attacking player in his own box and the clumsyness of it.
Dithering on the ball is not an offence punishable by the award of a penalty and by your own description Fred cleared the ball with his striking leg before the Brentford player ‘ran into it.’ How on earth does that constitute a foul? I have watched literally thousands of games in my time and I have never seen a penalty given for a situation like yesterday’s. You say that you have, so I would genuinely be interested to see one of the numerous examples to which you refer.
Dithering on the ball is not an offence but it gave opportunity for a coming together like that to happen.
Straight off the top of my head, Van Dyk on Lamela here at 02:09, defender goes to clear the ball while the attacker comes in on the blindside. More contact in this instance but very similar incident.
@aloysius said:
I know it's easy to justify losing to Brentford as a fully expected result. But this is a side we've played twice before, drawing 1-1 and 0-0. I know Brentford traditionally start the season slowly before moving through the gears - but given the enormity of the task facing us, that's exactly what we need to be doing as well, not going backwards.
We're a side that looks exhausted and with a squad that's pretty threadbare. Hardly the best place to be going into a massive run of games that will come at us thick and fast.
But let's remember, there were only one or two of us arguing that we should use the January window to strengthen the squad sufficiently to give us a chance to stay up. Most of you were happy to accept that spending money now would be a false economy. Maybe you're all right; but we saw the result of that decision yesterday.
The one thing Gareth needs to do now is accept defeat with the formation and move to one that sacrifices a forward for more defensive cover. Every side has now played us once and every side now knows how to exploit the gaps out wide on the counter attack. They all have the clinical players to do so. He may not be able to call on strength in depth in our squad to prevent a regular tonking, but Gareth can change the formation to try and do so.
Gareth doesnt seem to be ever prepared to move away from the high intensity long ball percentage philosophy, and to maximise potential from set pieces. The difference is we now need a win, every other game, so has taken the risk of playing an extra man forward, and giving less cover to the full backs.
It was always going to be difficult this season, but I believe many of the reasons we are adrift at the bottom are.
The pitches are very good, the players are technically good and most teams play a possession based game. You simply will not win many games with 30% of possession.
No suprise that the two teams that play the most direct game, are the bottom 2, (also possibly the two with the least funds).
The Dark Arts (Time wasting,Cheating,playacting, feigning injuries) no longer are we the leaders in this field, often we have been outmanouvered in this particularly unpleasant aspect of the game.
I do wonder, if and when the whole management team have their end of season inquest, if they will continue with the direct/percentage game. Or come to the conclusion that we must try and play through the thirds, and carve out chances through great movement and slick passing
@glasshalffull said:
Vincey, I’m sorry but that incident is nothing like yesterday’s and interestingly the referee did not initially give it until his assistant flagged.
It’s similar in that Fred/Van Dyk were going to clear the ball and were not expecting a challenge from an opposing player. Clever play from the attacker to nip in just before knowing that if he gets there first he wins the foul.
Canos actually doesn’t make a good job of it yesterday because he didn’t make great contact with the ball (although he got there first).
There’s undoubtedly a coming together and therefore a decision for the ref to make, if Fred clears early then there’s no decision to be made, is the point that I am making.
@vincey sorry but I’d keep thinking because that incident is not even close to being similar to yesterday. It was never a penalty, no matter how you dress it up.
It meant the game was over as a contest as we were in it until that stage. I don’t think we lost the game because of the decision per se as our defensive game was all over the place and more than likely Brentford would have won anyway, but it robbed us of any chance we did have.
@Quarterman said: @vincey sorry but I’d keep thinking because that incident is not even close to being similar to yesterday. It was never a penalty, no matter how you dress it up.
It meant the game was over as a contest as we were in it until that stage. I don’t think we lost the game because of the decision per se as our defensive game was all over the place and more than likely Brentford would have won anyway, but it robbed us of any chance we did have.
I’m not claiming it was a blatant penalty, it actually looked more of a penalty in real time to me and that’s why I can see why it was given. Would VAR have ruled it out? Who knows.
Realistically Brentford looked like they would score every time they attacked yesterday so I absolutely don’t think it made a difference to the result. We looked dangerous upfront and I’ve been really impressed with our attacking play, but defensively we have been awful recently.
But let's remember, there were only one or two of us arguing that we should use the January window to strengthen the squad sufficiently to give us a chance to stay up. Most of you were happy to accept that spending money now would be a false economy. Maybe you're all right; but we saw the result of that decision yesterday.
@aloysius I dont remember most of us being opposed to strengthening in January...but quite a few not keen on overspending. But it must be nice for one or two of you to be proved right though.?
@Quarterman said: @vincey sorry but I’d keep thinking because that incident is not even close to being similar to yesterday. It was never a penalty, no matter how you dress it up.
It meant the game was over as a contest as we were in it until that stage. I don’t think we lost the game because of the decision per se as our defensive game was all over the place and more than likely Brentford would have won anyway, but it robbed us of any chance we did have.
I’m not claiming it was a blatant penalty, it actually looked more of a penalty in real time to me and that’s why I can see why it was given. Would VAR have ruled it out? Who knows.
Realistically Brentford looked like they would score every time they attacked yesterday so I absolutely don’t think it made a difference to the result. We looked dangerous upfront and I’ve been really impressed with our attacking play, but defensively we have been awful recently.
Of course VAR would have ruled it out, what are you talking about?
@Quarterman said: @vincey sorry but I’d keep thinking because that incident is not even close to being similar to yesterday. It was never a penalty, no matter how you dress it up.
It meant the game was over as a contest as we were in it until that stage. I don’t think we lost the game because of the decision per se as our defensive game was all over the place and more than likely Brentford would have won anyway, but it robbed us of any chance we did have.
I’m not claiming it was a blatant penalty, it actually looked more of a penalty in real time to me and that’s why I can see why it was given. Would VAR have ruled it out? Who knows.
Realistically Brentford looked like they would score every time they attacked yesterday so I absolutely don’t think it made a difference to the result. We looked dangerous upfront and I’ve been really impressed with our attacking play, but defensively we have been awful recently.
Of course VAR would have ruled it out, what are you talking about?
It’s a 50/50 collision and the Brentford player got to the ball first. Is it a blatant penalty? No. Is it a coming together that could have been avoided? Yes.
I did think we would struggle to score a third but we had shown it was not out of the question. The pen definitely changed things and it was a dreadful decision. Can we stop trying to convince @Vincey now though. Life is too short.
@drcongo said:
Out of interest @Vincey, did you watch any of the replays?
Many times, quite clearly the Brentford player gets to the ball first and that’s what causes the problem.
Look how far Fred’s clearance went (nowhere) because Canos nudged the ball meaning Fred sliced it.
As soon as Canos got there first it causes us a problem.
That still doesn't make it a penalty
Your argument seems to be that you know it wasn't a penalty, but that he should have cleared it sooner and so when the ref then made a really poor decision it was somehow justified
It's bonkers. Make the point about Fred dithering if you like, but don't the make the leap to it somehow being a justifiable penalty when he cleared the ball into touch
In all the discussion about the penalty I had almost forgotten the possibility that Adeniran was fouled in the build up to Brentford’s 3rd goal. I’m not making excuses because we were soundly beaten by a far superior team (the best in the division in my opinion) but a lot of things did go against us yesterday.
@drcongo said:
Out of interest @Vincey, did you watch any of the replays?
Many times, quite clearly the Brentford player gets to the ball first and that’s what causes the problem.
Look how far Fred’s clearance went (nowhere) because Canos nudged the ball meaning Fred sliced it.
As soon as Canos got there first it causes us a problem.
That still doesn't make it a penalty
Your argument seems to be that you know it wasn't a penalty, but that he should have cleared it sooner and so when the ref then made a really poor decision it was somehow justified
It's bonkers. Make the point about Fred dithering if you like, but don't the make the leap to it somehow being a justifiable penalty when he cleared the ball into touch
If you think he ‘cleared the ball into touch’ then I think you need to look again as the ball actually barely travelled a couple of metres.
It was a 50/50 coming together where both players took a swipe at the ball, both ended up on the floor, ref was always going to blow his whistle and give something.
Another somewhat similar penalty incident was in the Italian Super Cup a couple of weeks ago. 2:20 into this video. Only given after VAR and a lot more contact than Fred made, but imagine this was in the referee's mind when he gave it.
@Croider said:
Another somewhat similar penalty incident was in the Italian Super Cup a couple of weeks ago. 2:20 into this video. Only given after VAR and a lot more contact than Fred made, but imagine this was in the referee's mind when he gave it.
Yep and it happens a few times a season, credit to the attacking player for being alert and sensing the opportunity to get to the ball first.
Vincey, I do admire your persistence but can we please stick to the facts? By your own admission, Fred was in possession so Canos clearly did not get to the ball first and because of his angle of approach, if Canos had reached the ball first it would have gone off to the left rather than the right which the replay clearly shows.
Comments
the ..... is more that @eric plant said which I agree with. Apologies to @eric_plant if selective quoting gives offence
I wanted to echo and add to the point that Gareth and the players haven't given up and hadn't given up when the team ran out onto the field at Torquay.
Circumstances make some games are hard and circumstances make some games easier.
Yesterday; we had serious defensive players missing; the game plan was disrupted by the warm-up injury to Pattison; some players could have still been in post covid recovery and we were blessed with a referee who seemed to think that because Wycombe were level with Brentford at half time Wycombe must be cheating.
We tried to turn round what became a very difficult situation after the absurd penalty, we didn't go for damage limitation.
In the future there will be other games which will be easier and we will win some of them. Maybe we will win enough.
Games and seasons can have turning points. I think it more likely that we will stay up than I will ever witness another referee give a penalty in a situation like yesterdays.
If there was a foul, it was on Fred. He must have wondered what hit him as the Brentford player slid into him from behind.
That sounds a bit crude in reflection.
On reflection even!
Dithering on the ball is not an offence but it gave opportunity for a coming together like that to happen.
Straight off the top of my head, Van Dyk on Lamela here at 02:09, defender goes to clear the ball while the attacker comes in on the blindside. More contact in this instance but very similar incident.
I was playing in a game once where the ref gave a penalty against us because a goal kick didn't go out of the area before our defender touched it
Was a cup quarter final with the scores level with under ten minutes to go
Yesterday's was a shocker though
Definite wind up
Vincey, I’m sorry but that incident is nothing like yesterday’s and interestingly the referee did not initially give it until his assistant flagged.
Gareth doesnt seem to be ever prepared to move away from the high intensity long ball percentage philosophy, and to maximise potential from set pieces. The difference is we now need a win, every other game, so has taken the risk of playing an extra man forward, and giving less cover to the full backs.
It was always going to be difficult this season, but I believe many of the reasons we are adrift at the bottom are.
The pitches are very good, the players are technically good and most teams play a possession based game. You simply will not win many games with 30% of possession.
No suprise that the two teams that play the most direct game, are the bottom 2, (also possibly the two with the least funds).
The Dark Arts (Time wasting,Cheating,playacting, feigning injuries) no longer are we the leaders in this field, often we have been outmanouvered in this particularly unpleasant aspect of the game.
I do wonder, if and when the whole management team have their end of season inquest, if they will continue with the direct/percentage game. Or come to the conclusion that we must try and play through the thirds, and carve out chances through great movement and slick passing
It’s similar in that Fred/Van Dyk were going to clear the ball and were not expecting a challenge from an opposing player. Clever play from the attacker to nip in just before knowing that if he gets there first he wins the foul.
Canos actually doesn’t make a good job of it yesterday because he didn’t make great contact with the ball (although he got there first).
There’s undoubtedly a coming together and therefore a decision for the ref to make, if Fred clears early then there’s no decision to be made, is the point that I am making.
@vincey sorry but I’d keep thinking because that incident is not even close to being similar to yesterday. It was never a penalty, no matter how you dress it up.
It meant the game was over as a contest as we were in it until that stage. I don’t think we lost the game because of the decision per se as our defensive game was all over the place and more than likely Brentford would have won anyway, but it robbed us of any chance we did have.
I’m not claiming it was a blatant penalty, it actually looked more of a penalty in real time to me and that’s why I can see why it was given. Would VAR have ruled it out? Who knows.
Realistically Brentford looked like they would score every time they attacked yesterday so I absolutely don’t think it made a difference to the result. We looked dangerous upfront and I’ve been really impressed with our attacking play, but defensively we have been awful recently.
Mourinho and Frank have sussed us out in the first half before tweaking things to nullify our threat and exploit our weaknesses after the break.
@aloysius I dont remember most of us being opposed to strengthening in January...but quite a few not keen on overspending. But it must be nice for one or two of you to be proved right though.?
Of course VAR would have ruled it out, what are you talking about?
It’s a 50/50 collision and the Brentford player got to the ball first. Is it a blatant penalty? No. Is it a coming together that could have been avoided? Yes.
Out of interest @Vincey, did you watch any of the replays?
Many times, quite clearly the Brentford player gets to the ball first and that’s what causes the problem.
Look how far Fred’s clearance went (nowhere) because Canos nudged the ball meaning Fred sliced it.
As soon as Canos got there first it causes us a problem.
I did think we would struggle to score a third but we had shown it was not out of the question. The pen definitely changed things and it was a dreadful decision. Can we stop trying to convince @Vincey now though. Life is too short.
if you think that's a pen then you clearly do not understand football . if that is a penalty there would be 10 penalties every match
That still doesn't make it a penalty
Your argument seems to be that you know it wasn't a penalty, but that he should have cleared it sooner and so when the ref then made a really poor decision it was somehow justified
It's bonkers. Make the point about Fred dithering if you like, but don't the make the leap to it somehow being a justifiable penalty when he cleared the ball into touch
In all the discussion about the penalty I had almost forgotten the possibility that Adeniran was fouled in the build up to Brentford’s 3rd goal. I’m not making excuses because we were soundly beaten by a far superior team (the best in the division in my opinion) but a lot of things did go against us yesterday.
Strange hill to die on thinking that this was a penalty. Probably the most damning angle of that embarrassing decision.
As I said at the time, if anything it could have been deemed a foul on Fred!
If you think he ‘cleared the ball into touch’ then I think you need to look again as the ball actually barely travelled a couple of metres.
It was a 50/50 coming together where both players took a swipe at the ball, both ended up on the floor, ref was always going to blow his whistle and give something.
Another somewhat similar penalty incident was in the Italian Super Cup a couple of weeks ago. 2:20 into this video. Only given after VAR and a lot more contact than Fred made, but imagine this was in the referee's mind when he gave it.
Yep and it happens a few times a season, credit to the attacking player for being alert and sensing the opportunity to get to the ball first.
Some you get and some you don’t.
That’s life.
Vincey, I do admire your persistence but can we please stick to the facts? By your own admission, Fred was in possession so Canos clearly did not get to the ball first and because of his angle of approach, if Canos had reached the ball first it would have gone off to the left rather than the right which the replay clearly shows.
Canos does actually get a little touch before Fred kicks it, but it's still not a foul, the big clue being that Fred kicks the ball
Fred kicks the ball clearly, simulation from the attacker who goes down like he’s been shot by a sniper’s bullet.