Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: Colemans Left Hook on April 28, 2024, 02:08:56 am
-
i have been at the magic mushrooms again
for a goal to be given the whole of the ball has to be over the line
so for handball to be given by a goalkeeper the whole of the ball has to be outside the area ???
i have just taken 2 photos off sky and I have my doubts the whole of the ball was outside the area
what does the team think ?
-
and
get your micrometers out !!
-
from the sky highlights on here
-
on this one he hasn't yet touched the ball
-
Was it a clear denial of goal scoring opportunity? There’s 3 Doncaster defenders around the ball and all ahead of any Gills attacker so the chance of the attacker getting there first was highly unlikely. The head from Sterry was not high power and if TLT had not instinctively stopped it, I think the chances of it reaching the goal before a defender mopped up was zero.
That said, appealing and losing if it’s just a 1 game ban isn’t worth it!
-
It has been highlighted on here that if a keeper handles the ball outside of his area but doesn’t deny a scoring opportunity then a yellow card should be issued by the ref.
It is a fair argument to say that Sterrys header was not going to go into the net and that one of our three defenders would have got back to clear before the Gillingham player got a chance to score.
Whether it is worth the risk of an appeal is debatable if it means a further suspension if it is turned down.
-
Handball is not a red card offence , Denying a goal scoring opportunity is . We are conditioned to think that if a keeper handles outside of the box they are off because most of the time it’s a one on one situation so we have become used to thinking that is always the outcome .
The appeal would be on the grounds that there were FOUR players between the attacker and the ball and that the attacker is outside of the box and some distance from the ball. I don’t therefore think it was a clear goal scoring opportunity. I’d appeal on those grounds.
-
Handball is not a red card offence , Denying a goal scoring opportunity is . We are conditioned to think that if a keeper handles outside of the box they are off because most of the time it’s a one on one situation so we have become used to thinking that is always the outcome .
The appeal would be on the grounds that there were FOUR players between the attacker and the ball and that the attacker is outside of the box and some distance from the ball. I don’t therefore think it was a clear goal scoring opportunity. I’d appeal on those grounds.
I think I’d appeal too.
Even if it fails this is surely a good enough argument that it would stay at 1 game.
-
It’s not a red card. Simple as that really. Yellow all day long
-
Looking back, the ref was very quick to make his decision and probably got caught up in the moment.
-
The header from Sterry was not going in the goal three defenders from Rovers there so it wasn’t a goal scoring opportunity therefore yellow. But will we appeal it how games will TLT be banned
-
It’s a credible appeal so we absolutely could not see the ban increased. At worst they stand by the original decision and punishment, but I’m increasingly of the view that a straight red card was the wrong call.
-
This is probably debatable but at least there is a lack of clarity. That penalty was absolutely nailed and that evil f**ker didn't even blink in dismissing it. What's the come back for such a colossal failure? Zero.
-
i have been at the magic mushrooms again
for a goal to be given the whole of the ball has to be over the line
so for handball to be given by a goalkeeper the whole of the ball has to be outside the area ???
i have just taken 2 photos off sky and I have my doubts the whole of the ball was outside the area
what does the team think ?
you do know the D isn’t part of the box !!!!! He was way outside,don’t think it was denying a goalscoring opportunity as it wasn’t going in and the striker had stopped and turned away and was no way would of got the ball with 3 defenders covering so think a good chance getting the 1 game ban overturned
-
After looking at it again I have changed my opinion, for the reasons stated above, it should be downgraded to a yellow card, and the appeal wouldn’t be frivolous
-
Watching the video back I think the key question is whether Sterry’s header would have gone in for an own goal. I think there’s a possibility it would have done, but equally it might have been cleared.
There is no way any Gillingham player is getting to the ball to score.
I don’t think any appeal could be considered frivolous given the genuine doubt around whether a goal was denied.
-
This is probably debatable but at least there is a lack of clarity. That penalty was absolutely nailed and that evil f**ker didn't even blink in dismissing it. What's the come back for such a colossal failure? Zero.
evil f**ker ....... is perhaps a bit strong?
-
I was right in line with Sterrys header and I can categorically say it was NOT Going in.
-
I was right in line with Sterrys header and I can categorically say it was NOT Going in.
Interesting, be helpful if there any video from behind the goal rather than side on. If Sterry’s header was not “on target” then no goal has been denied.
-
https://twitter.com/drfc_official/status/1784500299190726966?t=nyoMawu1k3fr9430kTiduA&s=19
-
It seems wrong to have to appeal to get the decision reviewed because appeals open the door to aggravated punishment . The referee's committee should automatically review all red card incidents after the game and rescind or confirm irrespective of appeals.
Why do football football regulators not understand that rugby is more dynamic from this point of view and take the example into football?
-
Compare and contrast to the deliberate handball given against Gillingham on the edge of their box, when Ironside oukd have been clean through on the keeper had the offence not been committed. That was a yellow card.
-
Maybe VAR could have defined if it was in/out of the penalty area, but alas…..
-
As I said on another thread do we know if there any precedents for success in this situation? The question of OGSO is largely one of judgement and it is one situation when the referee is probably quite reasonably adjudged to be the best person to make such a decision.
It is surely indisputable that it is an “opportunity” to score a goal and it was central with no one behind the defenders but an open goal. An “obvious opportunity” does not equate with a 100% certain goal. Proving that will not make the case.
It is not a question of being able to look at it technically as with a VAR offside decision where it is a matter of fact.
-
No way is part of the ball in the box. TLT is on the edge of the D, that’s 4 yards from the main box. He’s not almost 12 feet tall including arms stretched out is he?
I agree it should only have been a yellow, but an appeal is too risky imho.
-
No way is part of the ball in the box. TLT is on the edge of the D, that’s 4 yards from the main box. He’s not almost 12 feet tall including arms stretched out is he?
I agree it should only have been a yellow, but an appeal is too risky imho.
that was my starter for 10 i am pleading a new angle on a new thread!!!
-
Based on where those photo’s are taken from I would say he handled the ball outside the penalty area.
Based on those photo’s I would say it is not a clear and obvious opportunity to score was denied by the hand ball. There are 3 defenders goal side of the Gills attacker.
So in normal circumstances I would say an appeal would be a chance worth taking but with what’s at stake right now is it worth taking any risk.
I would say it’s 70/30 in our favour looking at those stills posted.
No disrespect to Louie Jones, but we really could do with our No 1 keeper for possibly the 2nd leg and hopefully the final play off matches.
The other BIG question is if we lost the appeal does the suspension get increased to either 2 or 3 games.
If it does not then yes no brainer we should appeal.
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on.
-
Watching the video back I think the key question is whether Sterry’s header would have gone in for an own goal. I think there’s a possibility it would have done, but equally it might have been cleared.
There is no way any Gillingham player is getting to the ball to score.
I don’t think any appeal could be considered frivolous given the genuine doubt around whether a goal was denied.
does the goals move at all when the ball gets closer because it would of gone a good 6 yard wide lol
-
Maybe VAR could have defined if it was in/out of the penalty area, but alas…..
really!!!!!! Wasn’t even close at least 2 yard outside
-
Watching the video back I think the key question is whether Sterry’s header would have gone in for an own goal. I think there’s a possibility it would have done, but equally it might have been cleared.
There is no way any Gillingham player is getting to the ball to score.
I don’t think any appeal could be considered frivolous given the genuine doubt around whether a goal was denied.
does the goals move at all when the ball gets closer because it would of gone a good 6 yard wide lol
Fair point, it might have been going wide. Tough to tell.
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on
.on wot grounds do you come up with that ???the ball wasn’t going in,don’t really blame the ref he takes one look at it so as soon as lino flags he had a decision to make which I feel was the wrong one
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on.on wot grounds do you come up with that ???the ball wasn’t going in,don’t really blame the ref he takes one look at it so as soon as lino flags he had a decision to make which I feel was the wrong one
There needs to be evidence it was not going in, not fans opinion, so far I’ve seen no evidence
-
Watching the video back I think the key question is whether Sterry’s header would have gone in for an own goal. I think there’s a possibility it would have done, but equally it might have been cleared.
There is no way any Gillingham player is getting to the ball to score.
I don’t think any appeal could be considered frivolous given the genuine doubt around whether a goal was denied.
does the goals move at all when the ball gets closer because it would of gone a good 6 yard wide lol
Fair point, it might have been going wide. Tough to tell.
But then it isn't DOGSO and thus based on the FA's rule book not a red card but a caution.
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on.
I thought that too. He got a fair bit on the header. Fair chance it would’ve gone in if on target, which was difficult to say from where I stood.
Maybe in hindsight it would’ve been better to keep TLT on and concede given it went to 1-2 straight away anyway, but I don’t even think TLT thought about it, looked instinctive to me.
No harm done on the day as we got what we needed. Let’s hope Jones can pull out a performance in the first leg. I wonder if there’s any prospect of an emergency loan if Lawlor is still unavailable? Or can you only do that in the event of injuries to all your keepers (ie not a suspension in TLT’s case)
-
good suggestion pib
i was going to say - doing the he says she say lark will get us nowhere and the only chance is down
the direct or indirect thread route definition of a player does the goalkeeper become a player outside the area because his special privileges are rescinded
can we concentrate on
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=290999.0
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on.
I thought that too. He got a fair bit on the header. Fair chance it would’ve gone in if on target, which was difficult to say from where I stood.
Maybe in hindsight it would’ve been better to keep TLT on and concede given it went to 1-2 straight away anyway, but I don’t even think TLT thought about it, looked instinctive to me.
No harm done on the day as we got what we needed. Let’s hope Jones can pull out a performance in the first leg. I wonder if there’s any prospect of an emergency loan if Lawlor is still unavailable? Or can you only do that in the event of injuries to all your keepers (ie not a suspension in TLT’s case)
Emergency keepers are if the only keeper available have under 3 first team appearances or something like that.
-
It seems wrong to have to appeal to get the decision reviewed because appeals open the door to aggravated punishment . The referee's committee should automatically review all red card incidents after the game and rescind or confirm irrespective of appeals.
Why do football football regulators not understand that rugby is more dynamic from this point of view and take the example into football?
Because most of the the people running professional football have never played the game and in a word
( just so I don’t waffle ) are useless, 2 words, incompetent.
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on.
About 2 foot I reckon. It’s not a stone cold 100% red card.
But yes we should move on. Get on with it and give Louis Jones massive support before the kick off at Crewe.
Sing his name proud and loud.
Yes he may not be as good as TLT, he isn’t as good we all know that but he is a DRFC goalkeeper and he deserves our backing. Give him as much confidence as we can. It’s a lonely place being a keeper when your confidence is down.
The outfield players have got 9 others on the field. The keeper has no one just himself.
-
Maybe VAR could have defined if it was in/out of the penalty area, but alas…..
really!!!!!! Wasn’t even close at least 2 yard outside
His feet were. His arm touching the ball is a lot further back.
-
Maybe VAR could have defined if it was in/out of the penalty area, but alas…..
really!!!!!! Wasn’t even close at least 2 yard outside
His feet were. His arm touching the ball is a lot further back.
like I said still at least 2 yard out it isn’t even close
-
in hindsight, TLT should have let the ball go past him. It was going miles wide.
-
Maybe VAR could have defined if it was in/out of the penalty area, but alas…..
really!!!!!! Wasn’t even close at least 2 yard outside
His feet were. His arm touching the ball is a lot further back.
like I said still at least 2 yard out it isn’t even close
The line marking the D isn't part of the penalty area it is simply an arc ten yards from the penalty spot to define the closest that players can stand when a penalty is to be taken.
-
Maybe VAR could have defined if it was in/out of the penalty area, but alas…..
really!!!!!! Wasn’t even close at least 2 yard outside
His feet were. His arm touching the ball is a lot further back.
like I said still at least 2 yard out it isn’t even close
The line marking the D isn't part of the penalty area it is simply an arc ten yards from the penalty spot to define the closest that players can stand when a penalty is to be taken.
I know because if it was it would of been close
-
apologies, donnievic. My remark wasn't aimed at you but was simply to add a bit of detail to your already correct remark.
-
It's unfortunate,but we have to move on,Last time we played Crewe over a 2 legged semi-final we had half a squad down with a bug and we still got through it and won,Im sure we can cope without TLT for 1 leg,we need to give whoever is in nets our fullest support.
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on.
Irrespective of how much power was in Sterry header, the ball was not going into the goal.
It would have gone for a corner had a defender not got there first.
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on.
Irrespective of how much power was in Sterry header, the ball was not going into the goal.
It would have gone for a corner had a defender not got there first.
That may well be true, but is there any evidence it was going wide apart from hearsay from a few fans?
-
He handled the ball miles out of the area.
The force Sterry put into the header meant no defender was going to catch up to the ball.
It's a stone cold red card. Just accept it and move on.
Irrespective of how much power was in Sterry header, the ball was not going into the goal.
It would have gone for a corner had a defender not got there first.
That may well be true, but is there any evidence it was going wide apart from hearsay from a few fans?
Unfortunately without the aid of video to prove the point, Filo is correct.
A panel would agree that someone in the middle of the pitch looking at this issue head on would have the best angle to judge this. They would conclude that the Ref would be that person.
Very difficult to argue against this.
-
I was right in line with Sterrys header and I can categorically say it was NOT Going in.
Maybe some people might think that Prez is fibbing then.
-
The evidence from the clip suggests that the header was going miles wide of the goal.
-
The evidence from the clip suggests that the header was going miles wide of the goal.
In real time, live, on Saturday I thought it was going wide.
Having watched the highlights I haven’t changed my mind.
-
I was right in line with Sterrys header and I can categorically say it was NOT Going in.
Maybe some people might think that Prez is fibbing then.
No one is saying that including me, what I’m saying is to go to an appeal you need conclusive evidence
-
The evidence from the clip suggests that the header was going miles wide of the goal.
In real time, live, on Saturday I thought it was going wide.
Having watched the highlights I haven’t changed my mind.
You know just looking at it again i agree, if you freeze the point where TLT gets his hand on it you can see he is positioned to the left of the penalty spot in a straight line (BST could do some geometry for us again and prove it) with this being the case and from the position that Sterry heads it (he's to the left of TLT as we look)couple with the distance he is out from the goal line then compounding the balls flight trajectory back would have it missing the left hand post by a good distance.
Maybe we should of appealed it.
BST get your slide ruler out.
-
The evidence from the clip suggests that the header was going miles wide of the goal.
In real time, live, on Saturday I thought it was going wide.
Having watched the highlights I haven’t changed my mind.
You know just looking at it again i agree, if you freeze the point where TLT gets his hand on it you can see he is positioned to the left of the penalty spot in a straight line (BST could do some geometry for us again and prove it) with this being the case and from the position that Sterry heads it (he's to the left of TLT as we look)couple with the distance he is out from the goal line then compounding the balls flight trajectory back would have it missing the left hand post by a good distance.
Maybe we should of appealed it.
BST get your slide ruler out.
It’s a shame we can’t use something like they do in cricket when looking to see whether a ball would have hit the stumps.
-
I watched a couple of Gillingham vlogs of the game.
One was filming from behind the goal. Unfortunately he didnt film the handball but did cover the resulting freekick
-
The evidence from the clip suggests that the header was going miles wide of the goal.
In real time, live, on Saturday I thought it was going wide.
Having watched the highlights I haven’t changed my mind.
You know just looking at it again i agree, if you freeze the point where TLT gets his hand on it you can see he is positioned to the left of the penalty spot in a straight line (BST could do some geometry for us again and prove it) with this being the case and from the position that Sterry heads it (he's to the left of TLT as we look)couple with the distance he is out from the goal line then compounding the balls flight trajectory back would have it missing the left hand post by a good distance.
Maybe we should of appealed it.
BST get your slide ruler out.
Not sure what the point is in doing that again. I was correct in the analysis of Dahlberg's position for that goal at Hillsborough and all that resulted in was decision from folk who didn't understand it. I'll let it pass this time, ta very much.
-
The problem with trying to make any definitive assessment on yesterday's incident is twofold.
1) There was little distance between Sterry's header and the ball hitting TLT's hand, and from a single, non-optimal video angle it's difficult to be certain what the trajectory of the ball was.
2) We've no idea what spin there might or might not have been on the ball, and therefore what direction it might have gone when it bounced.
All in all, there's not enough clear data to say that the ref definitely got the decision wrong. He might have done, but no panel is going to reverse the decision based on the info we've seen.
-
The evidence from the clip suggests that the header was going miles wide of the goal.
In real time, live, on Saturday I thought it was going wide.
Having watched the highlights I haven’t changed my mind.
You know just looking at it again i agree, if you freeze the point where TLT gets his hand on it you can see he is positioned to the left of the penalty spot in a straight line (BST could do some geometry for us again and prove it) with this being the case and from the position that Sterry heads it (he's to the left of TLT as we look)couple with the distance he is out from the goal line then compounding the balls flight trajectory back would have it missing the left hand post by a good distance.
Maybe we should of appealed it.
BST get your slide ruler out.
Not sure what the point is in doing that again. I was correct in the analysis of Dahlberg's position for that goal at Hillsborough and all that resulted in was decision from folk who didn't understand it. I'll let it pass this time, ta very much.
Let’s be honest, you were right about the Dahlberg thing, in your own opinion.
I posted pictures which clearly proved that from the angle you showed that things are not what you wanted us all to believe.
-
I think the ref knew he'd dropped a clanger with the red card and it affected his decision making from then on...but usually a ref will try and even things up this guy seemed intent on giving nothing to us
-
if you stop the video anywhere in the first half that shows the goalposts we were attacking you can see how the groundsman conveniently cut the grass to effectively to create two parallell lines as i have shown by extrapolating
with my tape
we can see these lines in the second half (the penalty spot is also visible) from that we can make a decision on whether the ball was going wide --
but thinking about it our defender would have "caught" the ball to kick it away so did the hand ball prevent a goal scoring (own -goal) attempt - nobody has mentioned our young defender would have cleared it
so look again noticing the lines caused by the groundsman
-
and on this one i have got both of the groundsman's lines in
both images are what i posted earlier
-
2 lines to the goalposts drawn in here
-
An appeal must be made. It wasn’t going directly in, the opposition player wasn’t guaranteed that he would score from it. It is a booking, I see no reason why the club wouldn’t have a good chance of winning the appeal.
-
Because they will back the referee’s real time (no var no replays no photos) on pitch decision.
If they argue the Gills player had an opportunity to nick the ball off our retreating defender, he would have had an open goal to aim for.
I agree it should have been a yellow but I would be surprised if we do appeal. Too risky for an extended ban.
I said before, Jones will do ok. Our defence has been great recently so it’s a team effort to keep the opposition out. TLT is the better keeper, but Jones will be fine.
-
Never mind the ins and outs , and a Mate of mine was seething over the Wall set up for the Free Kick
He said watch it (and I hadn't noticed) their Player stood in wall with Haks alongside them inexplicably when their player moved so did Haks leaving a huge gap
Can't criticise anyone but it was a free shot and they took it . Suspect this will have been noticed and ironed out for future games
COYR ... I'll give you mates Email as he doesn't post on here. He has a point though
-
Never mind the ins and outs , and a Mate of mine was seething over the Wall set up for the Free Kick
He said watch it (and I hadn't noticed) their Player stood in wall with Haks alongside them inexplicably when their player moved so did Haks leaving a huge gap
Can't criticise anyone but it was a free shot and they took it . Suspect this will have been noticed and ironed out for future games
COYR ... I'll give you mates Email as he doesn't post on here. He has a point though
Just watched it back, isn't that technically a free kick to us? He's too close to the wall their player in theory?
Of course Jones didn't have much time to set up having just come on.
-
From where we were behind the goal (almost directly in line) the wall placement looked awful and seemed to leave half the goal to go at. Could see it playing out as it did a mile off. Really unenviable situation for any goalkeeper to come on to, and it looked like he didn’t get / take any chance to set the wall up properly. Anyhow, great save from Jones at the end and we’re going to need him at his best next Monday.
I still think the red card was harsh but totally get the argument that there’s little point appealing. It wasn’t a glaringly obvious error by the ref, hence why we’re still debating it on here. Need to move on now.
-
Because they will back the referee’s real time (no var no replays no photos) on pitch decision.
If they argue the Gills player had an opportunity to nick the ball off our retreating defender, he would have had an open goal to aim for.
I agree it should have been a yellow but I would be surprised if we do appeal. Too risky for an extended ban.
I said before, Jones will do ok. Our defence has been great recently so it’s a team effort to keep the opposition out. TLT is the better keeper, but Jones will be fine.
One obvious fact that has not been mentioned is the reaction of the Rovers players to the decision to send TLT off. They accepted it… powerful evidence that they felt the ref was right!
-
From where we were behind the goal (almost directly in line) the wall placement looked awful and seemed to leave half the goal to go at. Could see it playing out as it did a mile off. Really unenviable situation for any goalkeeper to come on to, and it looked like he didn’t get / take any chance to set the wall up properly. Anyhow, great save from Jones at the end and we’re going to need him at his best next Monday.
I still think the red card was harsh but totally get the argument that there’s little point appealing. It wasn’t a glaringly obvious error by the ref, hence why we’re still debating it on here. Need to move on now.
Really poor aftertime by me admittedly but I said to my lad at the time that I fancied them scoring from the free kick. Like you say, the whole setup looked wrong.
-
Never mind the ins and outs , and a Mate of mine was seething over the Wall set up for the Free Kick
He said watch it (and I hadn't noticed) their Player stood in wall with Haks alongside them inexplicably when their player moved so did Haks leaving a huge gap
Can't criticise anyone but it was a free shot and they took it . Suspect this will have been noticed and ironed out for future games
COYR ... I'll give you mates Email as he doesn't post on here. He has a point though
you could be right about there player not being the required distance away bit hard to tell as he goes behind the wall and presume stands where jones can’t see it,people say the wall is set up wrong and it isn’t really,he has to set it up to the one side so other player can’t curl it Round like moly did at Morecombe and then also wants to try to be able to see the ball being hit,yes you could say he got beat at his side of the goal but it was struck well and their player moved across and towards the edge of the wall and possibly blocking his view until it’s too late
-
From where we were behind the goal (almost directly in line) the wall placement looked awful and seemed to leave half the goal to go at. Could see it playing out as it did a mile off. Really unenviable situation for any goalkeeper to come on to, and it looked like he didn’t get / take any chance to set the wall up properly. Anyhow, great save from Jones at the end and we’re going to need him at his best next Monday.
I still think the red card was harsh but totally get the argument that there’s little point appealing. It wasn’t a glaringly obvious error by the ref, hence why we’re still debating it on here. Need to move on now.
A wall pretty much always leaves a good chunk of the goal to aim at. You can't cover the whole of the goal unless you use every outfield player in the wall. That sets the striker the option of a clear shot towards a half of the goal that the keeper should be covering, or a difficult curl over the wall to the other side of the goal.
The problem was that Jones didn't get a form hand on the ball, after appearing to take half a step to the other side as if he was expecting the shot to be curled over the wall into the opposite corner. Doing that made him slower to get down to where the ball did go.
-
From where we were behind the goal (almost directly in line) the wall placement looked awful and seemed to leave half the goal to go at. Could see it playing out as it did a mile off. Really unenviable situation for any goalkeeper to come on to, and it looked like he didn’t get / take any chance to set the wall up properly. Anyhow, great save from Jones at the end and we’re going to need him at his best next Monday.
I still think the red card was harsh but totally get the argument that there’s little point appealing. It wasn’t a glaringly obvious error by the ref, hence why we’re still debating it on here. Need to move on now.
A wall pretty much always leaves a good chunk of the goal to aim at. You can't cover the whole of the goal unless you use every outfield player in the wall. That sets the striker the option of a clear shot towards a half of the goal that the keeper should be covering, or a difficult curl over the wall to the other side of the goal.
The problem was that Jones didn't get a form hand on the ball, after appearing to take half a step to the other side as if he was expecting the shot to be curled over the wall into the opposite corner. Doing that made him slower to get down to where the ball did go.
Totally understand that the wall will always leave space at one side for the keeper to see. But the placement just looked all wrong from where we were and a good half of the goal was open for exactly what happened.
-
From where we were behind the goal (almost directly in line) the wall placement looked awful and seemed to leave half the goal to go at. Could see it playing out as it did a mile off. Really unenviable situation for any goalkeeper to come on to, and it looked like he didn’t get / take any chance to set the wall up properly. Anyhow, great save from Jones at the end and we’re going to need him at his best next Monday.
I still think the red card was harsh but totally get the argument that there’s little point appealing. It wasn’t a glaringly obvious error by the ref, hence why we’re still debating it on here. Need to move on now.
A wall pretty much always leaves a good chunk of the goal to aim at. You can't cover the whole of the goal unless you use every outfield player in the wall. That sets the striker the option of a clear shot towards a half of the goal that the keeper should be covering, or a difficult curl over the wall to the other side of the goal.
The problem was that Jones didn't get a form hand on the ball, after appearing to take half a step to the other side as if he was expecting the shot to be curled over the wall into the opposite corner. Doing that made him slower to get down to where the ball did go.
It illustrates why TLT is first choice. We’ve seen before that Jones does not have as much strength in his hands as we might hope - quite apart from his generally slow reactions.
-
It wasn’t a glaringly obvious error by the ref, hence why we’re still debating it on here.
Unlike the foul on Maxwell, in their area, that wasn’t given!
-
On the subject of defensive walls, no one has mentioned the direct free kick we got late on in the second half for the handball by their defender right on the edge of the box.
The ref didn’t get the wall back anywhere near far enough, possibly seven or eight yards only.
When he did his pacing out of the distance he did it in a curve then used his spray foam.
When the ref turned his back the wall move ahead of the spray foam and he didn’t spot it.
There was also another Gills player to the left of Moly who was only about five or six paces away from the ball too and the ref sprayed his foam where the said Gills player was standing.
Shocking again by the ref.
-
From where we were behind the goal (almost directly in line) the wall placement looked awful and seemed to leave half the goal to go at. Could see it playing out as it did a mile off. Really unenviable situation for any goalkeeper to come on to, and it looked like he didn’t get / take any chance to set the wall up properly. Anyhow, great save from Jones at the end and we’re going to need him at his best next Monday.
I still think the red card was harsh but totally get the argument that there’s little point appealing. It wasn’t a glaringly obvious error by the ref, hence why we’re still debating it on here. Need to move on now.
A wall pretty much always leaves a good chunk of the goal to aim at. You can't cover the whole of the goal unless you use every outfield player in the wall. That sets the striker the option of a clear shot towards a half of the goal that the keeper should be covering, or a difficult curl over the wall to the other side of the goal.
The problem was that Jones didn't get a form hand on the ball, after appearing to take half a step to the other side as if he was expecting the shot to be curled over the wall into the opposite corner. Doing that made him slower to get down to where the ball did go.
It illustrates why TLT is first choice. We’ve seen before that Jones does not have as much strength in his hands as we might hope - quite apart from his generally slow reactions.
Yeah, his reaction to that bullet header near the end was really slow, and there was no strength in his hand as he kept it out.
Why are people doing this? The young kid's doing his best, and will do at Crewe. We all know that TLT is better than Louis, but if Louis makes any slip-ups and costs us the game at Crewe, then TLT will be just as culpable, because his mistake is the reason why Louis is playing.
-
The evidence from the clip suggests that the header was going miles wide of the goal.
In real time, live, on Saturday I thought it was going wide.
Having watched the highlights I haven’t changed my mind.
You know just looking at it again i agree, if you freeze the point where TLT gets his hand on it you can see he is positioned to the left of the penalty spot in a straight line with this being the case and from the position that Sterry heads it (he's to the left of TLT as we look)couple with the distance he is out from the goal line then compounding the balls flight trajectory back would have it missing the left hand post by a good distance.
Maybe we should of appealed it.
Maybe the powers that he have agreed that the ball was going wide of the goal after Sterry headed it and that one of our three defenders would have got to the ball before the lone Gillingham attacker could have tried to knock the ball into the goal.
One our our posters (Prez) said he was right in line with the ball and that it was definitely not going into the goal.
Knowing Prez, I have no doubt that he be correct in what he said.
-
if you stop the video anywhere in the first half that shows the goalposts we were attacking you can see how the groundsman conveniently cut the grass to effectively to create two parallell lines as i have shown by extrapolating
with my tape
we can see these lines in the second half (the penalty spot is also visible) from that we can make a decision on whether the ball was going wide --
but thinking about it our defender would have "caught" the ball to kick it away so did the hand ball prevent a goal scoring (own -goal) attempt - nobody has mentioned our young defender would have cleared it
so look again noticing the lines caused by the groundsman
and they say the other man's grass is always greener (think about it ) part 1
-
if you stop the video anywhere in the first half that shows the goalposts we were attacking you can see how the groundsman conveniently cut the grass to effectively to create two parallell lines as i have shown by extrapolating
with my tape
we can see these lines in the second half (the penalty spot is also visible) from that we can make a decision on whether the ball was going wide --
but thinking about it our defender would have "caught" the ball to kick it away so did the hand ball prevent a goal scoring (own -goal) attempt - nobody has mentioned our young defender would have cleared it
so look again noticing the lines caused by the groundsman
and they say the other man's grass is always greener (think about it ) part 2
SO THE GILLINGHAM GROUNDSMAN - THANKS TO THE WAY HE CUT THE GRASS AND PRODUCED THE PARALLEL LINES - SAVES THE DAY FOR US AND THE CURSE IS BROKEN
DID YOU KNOW CREWE ALSO GOT A SENDING OFF REVERSED SO THE BLOKE COULD PLAY AGAINST COLCHESTER.
TO THINK CREWE HAVE SPENT ALL WEEK DEVELOPING A CUNNING PLAN TO PLAY ON "JONES" AND IT HAS FALLEN ON STONY GROUND