In the context of what Stutts said I think the singing at 5 nil down is fair enough. I will say usually if we are losing badly Im generally too angry and pi$$ed off to even consider singing. Its like the Mexican wave at games, drives me nuts during a big gameQuote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I think Scales has clearly tripped Bellingham eight yards out from goal with only O'Dowda nearby to stop a shot that has a high chance of going in. To be honest, there may be more a case that he avoided a direct red by virtue of the double jeopardy rule than that he shouldn't have been booked at all. (I don't think it was a straight red - O'Dowda was probably close enough to cover - but for me it's closer a straight red than nothing at all. A yellow is entirely reasonable for me)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Is that the rule though? If he stops a clear scoring chance then it’s a definite yellow? I was wondering if that might be the case. It deemed to me like an instinctive flick out of the leg and that a penalty was punishment enough but if there’s a definite directive on it then that’s that I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I thought Kane could be a straight red because he raised his hands but unfortunately it was more of a push of the chest than a strike to the face like Molumby was trying to make out.
We definitely need to get cuter in how we play the ref. The blatant lack of VAR was shocking and if surrounding the ref and protesting makes the video ref look at it properly then so be it.
Even Ferguson barely protested
Yeah, fair, but at same time it was a “normal” foul and not a bad tackle by any description.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Overall I thought the ref was very officious and at times just plain wrong.
I was at the rugby in Dublin on Friday. A yellow card changed the game entirely. Argentina were 5 maybe 7 points ahead after 3 minutes, then reversed, Argentina yellow, then before you could blink we were 12-0 up substantially due to the man advantage. A 17 point swing in minutes. I’m not saying the rugby yellow was wrong, it wasn’t, but shows how game changing it can be.
In that context, back to the footy, I think a ref can take the whole context into account in the Scales case: soft technical yellow followed by an honest non-violent tackle, penalty awarded, 40 minutes left and making the whole outcome certain.
Do I really want to be the officious ***** who completely decides the game or do I exercise some discretion? If the situation was reversed I think he’d have hesitated to send an England player off. He hesitated to award us a pretty certain penalty so I think I know the answer to my own question.
And even worse, it completely negated arguably the best meme tackle ever by an Irish player in the social media era :)
Yep - see here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixer82
My emphasis on "must". You can argue over whether it was an obvious goal-scoring opportunity or not, but again, given there was only O'Dowda back and given Bellingham's position eight yards out and central, I think it's a fairly good chance he was going to get a shot away. For me, Scales has given the ref no choice there.Quote:
There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour including if a player:
denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by committing an offence which was an attempt to play the ball or challenge for the ball and the referee awards a penalty kick
Certainly wasn't a bad or even a cynical foul. But for the rule, that doesn't matter (see above). Scales knows the rules too (you would hope) - I don't like this idea of blaming the ref for "completely deciding" a game when really it's the player who's done it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
The referee was atrocious. Your post is spot on. Someone else mentioned it too on a previous page. The penalty calls were one thing, but there were 2-3 frees in decent positions (where we could have tested Pickford directly) that somehow went uncalled. I also thought - and so did some others i was chatting to at the time - that the second yellow was "debatable" (my words). And he couldnt wait to give Scales the first yellow where a warning would have sufficed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
When you lose 5 nil its hard to focus on the ref too much, but I have to admit I think it is relevant in this case. A few days removed from the game Im still not particularly pi$$ed off about it tbh. Maybe its just that we've been so beaten down over the last few years that its hard to care anymore, but even in the last few years Ive been more annoyed by lesser scores.
We've had plenty of games over the years where we've got a battering by the other team and somehow managed to get a result out of it. Russia away when Richard Dunne was amazing, the Germany Shane Long game, you can even go back as far as Euro 88 against the English when Houghton scored, we were murdered that day but managed to get a win.... I say all that to say that with the right rub of the green and some competent refereeing that 1st half was setting us up for another one of those results potentially. Its all ifs, buts and maybes but it was going well.
I know people have said that a defensive backs to the wall performance in one half of football should be nothing to celebrate, but for me it was about how the manager had learned the lessons from previous games and come up with a plan that was different to what we had seen previously under him. Thats the part I found encouraging. The roll of Collins in particular was something that has been called for for years on these pages and it was working really well. I always argued against Collins being played as a midfielder, and Im still not sure its the answer going forward but it was good. Kane wasnt getting a sniff and Kelleher really wasnt having a huge amount to do. If we had gotten at least 1 of those penalties going into half time then things might have been very different.
Now, we dont know if we would have held on in the 2nd half even with 11 men on the pitch. I still think however there was a massive dose of sh1te luck the way the 3 goals came so close together. The 2nd goal was just such a lucky bounce, and the 3rd wasnt great defending but was a baby toe from being offside. Then it was game over and we gave some subs a run (btw its a conversation for maybe another time, but I thought Manning showed in his time on the pitch why managers dont pick him unless forced to).
We've come away from the Nations League disappointed as usual, but I really do think there are potential positives with this manager for the future. Hes shown that hes not afraid to make big decisions and have a bit of accountability for the players. Leaving out Doherty and Browne after the Greek mistakes shows that he has a bit of steel in him and I think as the squad continue to expand with young players there is true competition for places and no one is guaranteed to be picked if they are not playing well. We've also seen that hes willing to mix up the tactics a bit, and it may take a little more time for players to get used to that, but again it shows that hes not just stubborn with one system like some managers in the past. It does show that not giving him friendlies before these games was criminal from the FAI.
Despite the result i find myself strangely encouraged. I think England were always likely to find a way through eventually, and it was an obvious penalty and yellow card for me. It was the first yellow card that might have been avoided. Scales needs to learn from that. It was completely unneccesary and cost him in the end. After that the combination of us having to chase the game and the extra space England had against 10 men was too much for us, and we fell apart.
I'd also say the injuries contributed to the collapse. A couple of wise old heads on the field might have helped.
On another night we get the penalty and make it to into the dressing room a goal up.
Onwards and upwards.
That was me Razor. :-) This is the way I see it. We are facing a WC campaign that is just 6 games. A sprint. Goals scored and matches won will have outsized gains. With the bigger picture of WC qualification on the horizon, why play for a 0-0 in a dead rubber game? Agree HH is willing to mix up the tactics – and I’d actually be more positive leaning on that. Far better to be adaptable/ flexible than set in our ways. However, after six games with HH, we do not know our strongest line-up, we do not know our best shape, we haven’t solved the midfield, we have not fixed the gaping hole on our left side, we don’t score goals, and we concede buckets. Our future is the hope of an easy draw. There’s been time to reflect since Sunday and listen to the other side. But for me, we’ve been here before – taking short term positives to miss out on the longer term gains.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razors left peg
There's a few things in there, but firstly the question about playing for a 0-0. I didn't quite see it that way, but it was at least pragmatic. He seen how much of a hiding we got in the home game and set out to not have that happen again. I thought the last 15 mins of the 1st half we actually attacked a bit and we did create 2 potential penalty situations. I don't see a lot wrong with going away to a team that we know are better than us and keeping things tight, especially early and seeing if we can get something on the break. There's no point in trying to go toe to toe with every team.... now of course it went tit's up but I still seen something reasonably valuable in that 1st half.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Not knowing our strongest lineup I think is ok too, we have fairly good competition for places in some areas so I think it's good that we don't have a set 11.
The midfield and left side are separate issues, I think that's a personel issue that we have to wait for someone to come along and help with rather than a fix by the manager. That said, the sweeper type position Collins played was promising. I think Smallbone being out is a big loss tbh, and we may see Moran and Lawal make a regular claim there soon too. Azaz I would also like to see deeper than the 2nd striker position we've used him in. As for the left side, Brady has done well and we missed him this window, but I've honestly no clue what the long term answer is.
I'm with you in thinking we've been here before, but I guess my point is that I just wouldn't take a whole lot of negatives from that England game, which is a bit mental given the score. I don't know for certain that Hallgrimsson is definitely the man for the long term, but I've seen enough so far that makes me think we have a chance of doing well with him... we'll see
It's a fair point HH really only has 12 months left in the role unless we qualify for the world Cup, which from where we are now would be an outrageous achievementQuote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Snowed in with work, so can’t reply fully to your post but on this – the two penalties that weren’t stemmed from long balls aimed at Evan. Evan is not a target or a pacey striker than gets in behind defences. I don’t see those opportunites as indicative of creativity/ a pre-designed attacking threat as we’re are not actually trying to capitalise on Evan’s strengths, rather they are low percentage, relief balls playing to his weaknesses. Btw, a strong and weaker penalty shout were high returns for those long balls – because ultimately they are low percentages balls that 9 out 10 times give possession away (especially in a low block as we are too deep to compete for eventual second balls). Not something to hang the positivity hat on imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razors left peg
Look I'm not saying it was perfect by any means, but going to Wembley and keeping things tight is how we should have approached the game, anything else would have been silly. Whether those 2 penalty claims came from good play or pure luck is kind of irrelevant given that we were in around their box and should have gotten something from it. To me that's playing the best hand we have against top teams, even if it doesn't necessarily suit Ferguson in that particular game..... but if we approached every game like that I'd have a massive problem with it. That was the only game so far he's approached like that and we have played some half decent football at times in the other games so far. He knows Evan is who he needs to build around for the long term, and proof of that is when he played both games in previous window when he really wasn't fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
I'm not going to say I have total confidence in Hallgrimsson yet, he's definitely made mistakes, but he has also done things I've like so I'm willing to keep positive about him for now even after that result at the weekend
Interesting read. But our strongest line-up when burdened with our left-side weakness, our feeble midfield, our leaking-bucket defence and our goal-shy forwards is not a strong line-up at all. Szmodics looks like taking the Aldridge 20-game road to goal while hell's fury awaits any non-flattering Ferguson reassessment.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
But HH taking the Mick/Jack road against quality opponents - as in the promising first-half is to his credit. It ultimately saved an even bigger thumping. There was definitely hope heading into the second half but we impoded following Scales dismissal. Fact is - he shouldn't have started the second half.
I left the house this morning to be greeted by my England season ticket holder neighbour. Luckily I had headphones on and pointed to them as a reason why I couldn't talk. I still have the satisfaction of saying hi to him as he came home from Wembley at around 11pm having lost on penalities to Italy.
Thread locked and archived