UCD 2 Shels 2

**Poor Student** · 03/10/2009, 2:17 PM

Well, what a game. It had everything the First Division is supposed to not, a good crowd, good atmosphere and plenty of entertainment.

I thought we played some really nice stuff and times and were worth the win. The lads showed great character to battle back from being behind twice, once with ten men. You can argue that Shelbourne failed to take the game to us in the final half hour but we played with confidence and skill. So cavalier was our attitude that I was convinced we'd concede on a break.

I can't comment on some of the flashpoints, the offside goaland the possible infringement as the Shels player closed in on goal in second half. I do feel Barron was fouled for Shels' second goal though. Without wanting to focus on negatives I thought that Shelbourne were again overly aggressive and the combustible Shorthall exploded in these circumstances. I'm very disappointed he was dragged down to that level but it's disappointed to see a second consecutive red card against Shelbourne where we have won a free kick and reacted to the aggressive posturing of their players that is characteristic of their attitude and style. Our best chance of taking something from the game was to play football and leave Shelbourne to their fouling and thankfully we regained our composure shorty after that red card and got our rewards.

I hope we can continue to play with the style and fluidity of the last month and carry that into our final five games. If we do that then I feel we can take the five successive wins needed to take the title. The return of Creevey is a great boost and I felt he made the difference when he came on last night. I think our large squad and high fitness levels will play a big role in the final stretch. Obviously we also need some of the other results to go our way in the coming weeks.

**Schumi** · 03/10/2009, 2:44 PM

Fantastic game alright.

On the 'incidents', Baron was held for their second goal, our player (I forget who it was) should have been sent of for the shirt pulling and we should have had a penalty when a Shels defender handled the ball on the ground in the box in the second half.

Even all of that nonsense can't take away from one of the most exciting games of football I've seen in years. Our midfield was excellent, Finn and Corry looked so assured on the ball in the first half but, not for the first time, we didn't get as many shots in as we should have. It was great to see us really go at them in the second half, especially after the sending off. They sat back too much but to see us have the confidence to keep pushing forward and get a thoroughly deserved goal was really encouraging.

Great to get news of Monaghan doing us a favour against Fingal too.

**pineapple stu** · 03/10/2009, 4:45 PM

Best game in a long while. Delighted to see Keely get his comeuppance for once again sending out a team - with better, more experienced players than ours - largely to niggle and defend.

Think Shorty's sending off turned the game for us, TBH. Focussed our minds and maybe got Shels complacent.

Can enjoy Tuesday now. I'll settle for a Waterford to beat Shels and Shels to beat Fingal just to screw Fingal over most

. Although obviously two draws are more preferable points-wise.

Wexford at home now is massive, especially with their away record. Hopefully there's a sense of "season over" creeping in. You'd have to fancy us to get nine points against Mervue, Athlone and Longford (though seven is arguably probably), and then the biggie against Waterford on the last day.

**John83** · 03/10/2009, 6:17 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

...Delighted to see Keely get his comeuppance for once again sending out a team - with better, more experienced players than ours - largely to niggle and defend....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

I was very impressed by how the lads continued to play nice passing football even as they went toe to toe with a brutish Shelbourne team. Harding was superb going forward, Finn amazing in the middle.

On the incidents:

It seems that our off-side goal was ruled out correctly.
Barron certainly seemed to have been held for Shels second goal - and got booked for complaining about it. Earlier, he'd gotten to a ball first and took a sly kick from Shels' 10 for his trouble.
Creevy should have walked for holding a Shels attacker who would otherwise have been one on one with Baron.
The incident Shumi mentioned, where a Shels defender fell over in the box and caught the ball was a stonewall penalty for us, I believe.

Waterford can catch us with their games in hand, and Shels can still go three ahead of us, so there's a lot to do yet, but with the form we're in, we'll be in the thick of it at the end.

**Poor Student** · 04/10/2009, 7:30 AM

Originally Posted by John83

Waterford can catch us with their games in hand, and Shels can still go three ahead of us, so there's a lot to do yet, but with the form we're in, we'll be in the thick of it at the end.

Thankfully that's now not possible as it stands after last night's result. It's at least in our own hands now to ensure we finish second. It would be heartbreaking to not at least make the playoffs. Hopefully both cup semi finals will go to a replay and tire out Fingal and Waterford.

**Kildareman** · 04/10/2009, 11:03 AM

UCD have been, by far, the best side we have played all season. Good football played at pace all over the park.
Shels continue to try to intimidate and bully their way through games.
Waterford were very disappointing, relying on high balls even out wide.
And Fingal, well they just seem to be lacking something.

**Kildareman** · 04/10/2009, 11:04 AM

But then again we could make a bad side look good....

**pineapple stu** · 04/10/2009, 5:31 PM

Originally Posted by John83

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

Hm. I'd say a combined UCD/Shels team would possibly have more Shels players than UCD players. I'd definitely say that if it didn't, that's a serious problem that Keely has caused, given the difference in budget. Let's refine my statement like that.

**pineapple stu** · 05/10/2009, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by John83

[*]It seems that our off-side goal was ruled out correctly.

Perhaps not.

Kilduff himself was my source (indirectly; came though Maccer) that the goal was offside. That's two blatant errors by linesbirds now that have - in theory - cost us six points against Shels.

**Schumi** · 05/10/2009, 3:00 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Perhaps not.

Bloody hell, good timing on the cameraman's part!

**pineapple stu** · 05/10/2009, 3:04 PM

It's a video. The poster is our Terry Butler.

**Schumi** · 05/10/2009, 3:26 PM

Ah right. Who's J Frazer then?

**pineapple stu** · 05/10/2009, 3:31 PM

Poster on the Shels forum. Probably has his name regularly misspelled in the Shels programme.

**Schumi** · 05/10/2009, 3:40 PM

That wasn't misspelled, it was mixed up with someone else.

**DmanDmythDledge** · 05/10/2009, 3:43 PM

That's offside. Killer's left foot would be just past the Shels defender; the angle just doesn't show it.

**pineapple stu** · 05/10/2009, 3:58 PM

Hm.

Here's the official definition of offside from wikipedia -

"nearer to an opponent's goal line" meant that "any part of his head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition."

I'm still stuck with the idea that there has to be daylight between the attacker and the last defender to be offside. On that definition, and on the way Killer's shadow is a bit ahead of the Shels defender, it appears dmanetc may well be right.

**John83** · 05/10/2009, 4:03 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

... On that definition, and on the way Killer's shadow is a bit ahead of the Shels defender, it appears dmanetc may well be right.

His shadow appears to be parallel to the lines on the pitch (hard to be precise there though), which would suggest that that's correct.

**Schumi** · 05/10/2009, 4:15 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

the official definition of offside from wikipedia

LOL

Regardless of the precise, official definition, it has to be called by a person who's likely not in direct line with the players and that looks too close to call in a split second.