Barry Conlons wig
Well-Known Member
crock of bin dipping shite, it was a shoulder in the back of stones, foul everyday apart from at clanfield.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
blue by birth
Well-Known Member
If you notice, Stones actually misreads the whole situation and gets attracted to the ball then realises he has over committed by about half a yard, which gives Firmino the opportunity.
Not a push for me, not strong enough from Stones.
He was barged in the back...it WAS a foul...can't believe how many people can't see that it was a foul.
If Stones had done that to pearly white in the area it would have been given as a penalty.
Shoulder to shoulder not a foul... shoulder/push in the back = foul play.
Exeter Blue I am here
Well-Known Member
If you notice, Stones actually misreads the whole situation and gets attracted to the ball then realises he has over committed by about half a yard, which gives Firmino the opportunity.
Not a push for me, not strong enough from Stones.
Exactly right TH. Good luck selling it on here though!
remember arthur mann
Well-Known Member
Yep !He was barged in the back...it WAS a foul...can't believe how many people can't see that it was a foul.
If Stones had done that to pearly white in the area it would have been given as a penalty.
Shoulder to shoulder not a foul... shoulder/push in the back = foul play.
meltonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2013
- Messages
- 8,723
It could have been given as a foul, would have been a fairly soft one though. I was more disappointed that the opportunity was there for Firmino to get to the ball - Stones was running in the wrong direction to begin with and it was because he had to adjust his run.
Metalartin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 12,443
Didn't even look like it was his shoulder to me, more arm/hand. As I said earlier we've had worse decisions than that go against us, especially away from home and it's no excuse to how we reacted in the minutes after it. That was uncharacteristic of this seasons City who are normally unflappable, that's what we should be focusing on.He was barged in the back...it WAS a foul...can't believe how many people can't see that it was a foul.
If Stones had done that to pearly white in the area it would have been given as a penalty.
Shoulder to shoulder not a foul... shoulder/push in the back = foul play.
Last edited:
If you notice, Stones actually misreads the whole situation and gets attracted to the ball then realises he has over committed by about half a yard, which gives Firmino the opportunity.
Not a push for me, not strong enough from Stones.
50/50 for me but 100% agree in Stones misreading the play.
Exactly. It's a soft foul, you can't count on refs to give it all the time. Stones could and should have dealt with that better.It could have been given as a foul, would have been a fairly soft one though. I was more disappointed that the opportunity was there for Firmino to get to the ball - Stones was running in the wrong direction to begin with and it was because he had to adjust his run.
Personally I think it was a foul, but whether they are given or not often depends on the viewing angle of the referee, I don't think we can complain that it wasn't , it wasn't an egregious mistake by the ref but probably a small one.He was barged in the back...it WAS a foul...can't believe how many people can't see that it was a foul.
If Stones had done that to pearly white in the area it would have been given as a penalty.
Shoulder to shoulder not a foul... shoulder/push in the back = foul play.
tornandfrayed
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 526
Exactly. It's a soft foul, you can't count on refs to give it all the time. Stones could and should have dealt with that better.
A foul is a foul. There's no such thing as a soft foul just a foul - an infringement of the rules which is penalised by the referee giving a free kick. As I said in a post yesterday we have reached the stage where we accept the incompetence of referees as normal and try to explain it away with expressions such as 'soft foul' or 'out muscled'.
50/50 for me but 100% agree in Stones misreading the play.
He had a split second where he could have cleared the ball but appeared to get caught in two minds. I think he thought he could pass it back to Ederson but then the ball seemed to pick up pace then he was pushed in the back. It was a foul all day long as it knocked him off balance I can't believe people saying it wasn't. Stones form is a bit worrying. Three games, three mistakes, three goals conceded.
Millwallawayveteran1988
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Sep 2010
- Messages
- 42,381
He had a split second where he could have cleared the ball but appeared to get caught in two minds. I think he thought he could pass it back to Ederson but then the ball seemed to pick up pace then he was pushed in the back. It was a foul all day long as it knocked him off balance I can't believe people saying it wasn't. Stones form is a bit worrying. Three games, three mistakes, three goals conceded.
Like last season. Virtually every mistake he made led to a goal. He has looked extremely ropey since coming back
tornandfrayed
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 526
Like last season. Virtually every mistake he made led to a goal. He has looked extremely ropey since coming back
Hire can it be his mistake if
He had a split second where he could have cleared the ball but appeared to get caught in two minds. I think he thought he could pass it back to Ederson but then the ball seemed to pick up pace then he was pushed in the back. It was a foul all day long as it knocked him off balance I can't believe people saying it wasn't. Stones form is a bit worrying. Three games, three mistakes, three goals conceded.
How was it his mistake if you accept it was a foul?
malg
Well-Known Member
It was actually a play on his words, I chose piss flapping for other reasons.Sorry for picking your's out, but no one is flapping? There's some comments on what was a very bizarre game,and folk trying to make sense of it,but no flapping. No one is panicking, no one is saying it's going tits up,no one saying it's going wrong, just some people trying to make sense. Hateful to lose against them that's the issue, annoyance more than flapping.
stan bowles
Well-Known Member
Speaking to a Liverpool fan at work today and after giving him the glare when asked "did you see the game ?" the conversation moved on about the main talking points of yesterday in a calm and level manner. I then asked him about the behaviour of the Liverpool fans towards Raheem Sterling and "why are they so bitter after 3 years considering Van Dyck, Lallana and Mane all did the same to force moves from their old club to move to Liverpool?" His reply was that Liverpool fans aren't bitter towards Sterling leaving them for City but because they know that booing and cat-calling him seriously puts him off his game and until he puts in a convincing performance against them they are going to use it as a tactic to beat him (and therefore us) with.
Seems like it's up to Raheem to silence Dipper critics but the hard evidence is that despite a remarkable season for us he continues to seriously disappoint whenever he returns to Anfield.
Seems like it's up to Raheem to silence Dipper critics but the hard evidence is that despite a remarkable season for us he continues to seriously disappoint whenever he returns to Anfield.
kippaxchris
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Dec 2011
- Messages
- 2,634
Anybody think Mangala would have been a better option instead of Stones yesterday? Was clumsy against Bristol but so was Stones. Mangala may have made a difference with his pace & Strength? Can't see Firmino troubling Manga for strength & pace on the second goal.
Hire can it be his mistake if
How was it his mistake if you accept it was a foul?
Hr had a chance to clear it but dithered and even though he was fouled he should still have been stronger.
Millwallawayveteran1988
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Sep 2010
- Messages
- 42,381
Anybody think Mangala would have been a better option instead of Stones yesterday? Was clumsy against Bristol but so was Stones. Mangala may have made a difference with his pace & Strength? Can't see Firmino troubling Manga for strength & pace on the lobbed goal.
No because Mangala is poor. Always has been always will be. Liverpool would have been all over him like a rash.
Millwallawayveteran1988
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Sep 2010
- Messages
- 42,381
Speaking to a Liverpool fan at work today and after giving him the glare when asked "did you see the game ?" the conversation moved on about the main talking points of yesterday in a calm and level manner. I then asked him about the behaviour of the Liverpool fans towards Raheem Sterling and "why are they so bitter after 3 years considering Van Dyck, Lallana and Mane all did the same to force moves from their old club to move to Liverpool?" His reply was that Liverpool fans aren't bitter towards Sterling leaving them for City but because they know that booing and cat-calling him seriously puts him off his game and until he puts in a convincing performance against them they are going to use it as a tactic to beat him (and therefore us) with.
Seems like it's up to Raheem to silence Dipper critics but the hard evidence is that despite a remarkable season for us he continues to seriously disappoint whenever he returns to Anfield.
If it works, why change it? Seems like a sensible move to me. If I was sat there I really couldn't be arsed booing every time someone touched a ball but the scousers seem to like that sort of stuff
Jimbojames
Well-Known Member
If you notice, Stones actually misreads the whole situation and gets attracted to the ball then realises he has over committed by about half a yard, which gives Firmino the opportunity.
Not a push for me, not strong enough from Stones.
Exactly how i saw it!