JadeWolf
Official Noddy pre match thread starter.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2017
- Messages
- 28,630
- Reaction score
- 59,454
We were tiring but still looked a threat.We definitely played for a point for the last half an hour. Subs reflected that too.
We were tiring but still looked a threat.We definitely played for a point for the last half an hour. Subs reflected that too.
A bit harsh but there is some truth in what you say. That is why I was keen on signing an attacking AM like Olmo who coming from deep would give the opposition something new to think about and offer a goalscoring threat. Our only attacking plan B seems to be to bring on Traore and hope his pace will create something out wide.
Our system is effective but opponents will increasingly nulilify it over the course of a season. Hopefully Nuno will keep innovating amd perhaps make a decisive signing or two in January.
They were blowing out their arses towards the end. Of course they’ve not developed full match fitness but flogging them to death can’t help.I don’t expect that many changes next Thursday. The fact so many players seemed off the pace today suggests they haven’t achieved full match fitness yet.
Genuine grounds for optimism.Did you forget posting Leicester failed to score? That we earned a very good point away after a 6,000 mile round trip in the week? That no matter how predictable if you are good enough you will always cause opposition trouble?
Perhaps you forgot to type in we have played Newcastle, Man City, three Europa cup games and Leicester first up in the PL and have yet to lose a game.
I guess the answer to that is quite simple ... it means that your team may draw or win a match that they otherwise wouldn’t.As Nuno said, what's the point of celebrating a "no goal"?
Somebody needs to tell Nuno to rotate the squad or this is going to be a very long season.
Surely, it’s a chance for 5 or 6 changes? Give Ruddy, Jesús, Cutrone, Vinagre, Traore & Saiss a game?I think we will see a lot of changes on Thursday.
This is exactly the point. It was entirely accidental, even slowed right down in the replay. It was a ricochet by every definition and his arm was exactly where it would normally be if you were jumping to head the ball. I could actually understand a ref in normal time with no replay disallowing the goal for handball, but not experts watching it with multiple angles and speeds. If this is an accurate application of the new rule, then this will ruin the game. I think it’s an error.
As for the outcome, it totally changed the game. From being sharp and on top after HT, after this farce, we lost our composure and nearly lost the game.
One word. Robbed.
the phrase 'complete inept morons' was my specific problem since you askExactly what is your problem with my post? At no point did I imply anything about me being in charge, I suggest you get a grown up to read posts before replying, or are you a interloper from another clubs forum?
I didn't expect to be on the wrong end of a VAR quite so soon but the rule is the rule I guess.
I can see why they've tried to make is as unambiguous as possible but when ithe handball was so clearly accidental it really stings.
There's no way of knowing whether it will be any better if the accidental element of the contact was open to interpretation.
Isn't it like saying that any challenge that results in injury to the opponent is automatically deemed to be a red card offence even if it wasn't actually a foul?
It would be nice to have the midfield option and I reckon that perhaps we might have been looking but didn't come up with the right player for one reason or other.
Where I disagree is the assumption by many that other teams will nullify our system of play. That it is perhaps a catastrophe waiting to happen. If the players are good enough, and they are, then that matters much more than predictable styles of play. Teams might know what's coming but stopping it won't be as easy as many are starting to believe.
I have to say this. Cutrone has two opportunities to run at defence but he has a glaring lack of pace which you need at PL level. I understand he’s a fox in the box type but he won’t create anything 30 to 40 yards out as he’s not quick enough
Unfortunately, under the NEW rules, accidental,or not doesn’t matter, the rules were applied correctly and we had better get used to it.
What I can’t get my head round is that accidental handball leading to a goal means disallowed, but accidental handball in open play can still be ok and play on. That is a total nonsense. As with fouls, the same rules should apply all over the pitch in every circumstance.
To get off the mark?So Cutrone is slow ???,
Wolverhampton council have adopted this policy for many yearsThe rule is stupid however it was correctly interpreted.
Not a chance of that.According to the new rules the goal was correctly ruled out however stupid that if Boly had been at the other end of the pitch it wouldn't have been a penalty against.
I just hope that when Liverpool get a similar 'goal' it's also ruled out.
That’s the point I was making. I’m not writing the bloke off at all. I’m saying he has no pace and we will need to play to his strengths by finding him in the box. Expecting him to run at players 30/35 yards out simply won’t workMaybe Cutrone should only be brought on if Traore is brought on, too, to provide those crosses in to the box?
Be careful because your accurate assessment will be viewed as writing him off.I would have considered bringing on Traore up top the way it was playing out.
Cutrone did nothing and in truth he doesn't look as though he will be able to do much in these type of games as he's not extremely quick and he may rely on service. That is going to be really useful in certain games when we need a presence in the box but we just defended so deep here.
Even though it's not Traore's position, I remember the chaos he caused at Arsenal as a forward when he just launched it up and he would have had that space in this game.
Unfortunately, under the NEW rules, accidental,or not doesn’t matter, the rules were applied correctly and we had better get used to it.
What I can’t get my head round is that accidental handball leading to a goal means disallowed, but accidental handball in open play can still be ok and play on. That is a total nonsense. As with fouls, the same rules should apply all over the pitch in every circumstance.
Surely, it’s a chance for 5 or 6 changes? Give Ruddy, Jesús, Cutrone, Vinagre, Traore & Saiss a game?
Agree on your second point. Seems utterly counter to the basic tenants of the game.
On the first, as I’ve commented elsewhere, it’s really important to read the precise rules being applied, and what the PL said was the offence in this instances, and then rewatch the highlights. The rules are written to try and exclude accidental deflections without getting back into the accidental vs deliberate intent argument. Hence the rules state, and the PL quote in their post match tweet, that the offender (Boly) must be in control/possession of the ball after the handball (otherwise exclusions apply for accidental hand/ball incidents). It is pretty clear in the video that three people came together, and neither Boly or the Leicester defender were in possession/control of the ball after it deflected off Boly’s upper arm. Dendocker was in control, but that doesn’t count, it has to be the person who’s hand/arm was involved according to the wording of the rule.
Hence the rule as written and quoted by the PL was incorrectly applied in my view. Would be good to see one of the retired FA refs weigh in next week with their opinion.
It would have been comfortable though. Jota at the end of the first half, Jimenez and Jota at the start of the second half. All very presentable chances they should have done much better with, stick one or two of those away and still limit the home side to pot shots from outside the box from which they don't get one on target until the 83rd minute - comfortable win regardless of possession stats (which is a stat we know Rodgers places emphasis on and Nuno doesn't). One of them goes in and Rodgers and Leicester get well and truly Nuno-dSuggesting we should have won quite comfortably.
A draw was fair IMO, agree we edged it if anything though because of clearer chances.