Newcastle United (A) | Post Match thread

Keeper! said:
Agreed but clearly Pep thinks out full backs play in his unique way and can't see that changing anytime soon.

Walker can defend but Cancelo is incapable of it.
Click to expand...
If Walker loses his pace, his demise could happen more quickly than people think. I’ll put it down to early season lack of sharpness but it wasn’t only St. Maximin who outran him yesterday. We won’t face that kind of intensity every week though.
 
The slaughtered lamb said:
If Walker loses his pace, his demise could happen more quickly than people think. I’ll put it down to early season lack of sharpness but it wasn’t only St. Maximin who outran him yesterday. We won’t face that kind of intensity every week though.
Click to expand...
If Walkers pace has gone he is finished, simply not good enough reader of the game, his pace lets him get away with his common brain farts.
 
I’m glad we got a point, according to the highlights on the screen at St James Park we lost 3-0.

First half yesterday, after the first ten minutes was dogshit, only really Gundogan and Ake looked anything like on it - and then Ake went off. Rodri has the occasional game where he’s away with the fairies and this was one of them. But that was a game we could have lost, so take the point.

League’s all over the place, give it another half a dozen games and things will look alright. Arsenal look good but have had the most gentle set of fixtures anyone could hope for - and Fulham at home next week.
 
Gingers Dad said:
I thought Phillips should have come on to play alongside Rodri. We needed an extra midfielder to win back control of the game. It would have allowed our fullbacks to play in more conventional way.
Click to expand...
No need we could’ve moved Bernie in there Foden was poor by his standards yesterday, Bernie is wasted on the right, ye I know he scored but his work rate in the middle was one of the things that pushed us last year. I’d have given Palmer a run on the right.
I think we were unlucky not to win yesterday , said to my da Newcastle would blow up 15-20 mins to the end and they did apart from a slight threat on the counter they were fucked, if it wasn’t for Pope we’d have score a few more.
 
chaddblue said:
Exactly. Not a clear and obvious error so VAR should not have intervened
Click to expand...

What annoys me the most is that that whole kerfuffle clearly stopped our momentum in its tracks. We had entirely seized the initiative. I believe that if the red card hadn't been given in the first place, and the ref had just got on with it with a yellow and a kick, we would have gone on to score. Newcastle were completely out of gas.
 
Vic said:
Just check the commentary decibels for their third and our third...
Click to expand...
So agree with this. Our equaliser was met with an almost disappointed tone of regret, it happens quite regularly across channels. I can almost imagine the commentators face looking like that rag fan with a moustache and mini radio at OT when he heard Aguero had won us the league, "they've scored".

I'm hoping it's simply because everyone likes an underdog and not a hatred of us per se
 
Keeper! said:
If Walkers pace has gone he is finished, simply not good enough reader of the game, his pace lets him get away with his common brain farts.
Click to expand...
Let’s get this right, Walker is being asked to play virtually in midfield which is ridiculous. This inverted full back nonsense needs to stop now, or else it’s going to be a very long season. Cannot employ these tactics against Palace. The players got us that result yesterday, despite the tactics being employed.
 
come-on-barney said:
Let’s get this right, Walker is being asked to play virtually in midfield which is ridiculous. This inverted full back nonsense needs to stop now, or else it’s going to be a very long season. Cannot employ these tactics against Palace. The players got us that result yesterday, despite the tactics being employed.
Click to expand...
I agree but not sure Pep does
 
Brian's Kid said:
So agree with this. Our equaliser was met with an almost disappointed tone of regret, it happens quite regularly across channels. I'm hoping it's simply because everyone likes an underdog and not a hatred of us per se
Click to expand...

I turned off the 5 Live commentary because the bias was so evident. Switched over to Alistair Mann and Michael Brown. Not wild about Mann as a commentator, to be honest, but his natural bias is tempered by Brown, and they do both make an effort to be objective, and give credit where credit's due on both sides. The open bias in favour of Newcastle on the BBC just sickened me in the end.
I think you're right about the underdog phenomenon up to a point. Although I seem to remember all rag goals being greeted with yells of triumph on tv and radio during their glory years. Maybe that was just my bitterness imagining it, I don't know. For sure, the whole fucking world and his little dog celebrated the Michael Owen goal in the 255th minute. And it was always “Good old Fergie, he always manages to do it!”. Yes, he always managed to do it by browbeating linos and the ref shamelessly.
 
come-on-barney said:
Let’s get this right, Walker is being asked to play virtually in midfield which is ridiculous. This inverted full back nonsense needs to stop now, or else it’s going to be a very long season. Cannot employ these tactics against Palace. The players got us that result yesterday, despite the tactics being employed.
Click to expand...
I’ll leave the tactics to Pep but you could clearly see Newcastle were overloading the wings. Not as easy to dictate tactics when the other team’s on top.
 
Law 12: FOULS AND MISCONDUCT

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.



Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball.

Trippier attempted to use excessive force when not challenging for the ball.
Made no attempt to get the ball.
Only aim was to stop KDB.
Knee height brutality.
RED CARD
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
Agreed. I was surprised it was a red to begin with. I thought going in toe-first rather than studs first showed how Trippier was trying to avoid injuring the player while still committing a “professional foul”. You could see Trippier telling Kev he was trying to avoid hurting him and Kev knew that I think. I can definitely see the other side — it COULD have been dangerous and maybe a red is needed just for “could haves” — but I agree with you. And this coming from me, still absolutely livid about Milner’s foul on Silva last year which was far more cynical, painful AND he was on a yellow. Of course I wanted Trippier gone but glad for the “game” writ large the card was reversed. I think the ref got it right in the end and TBH had a good game overall.
Click to expand...
Its simple in my mind. The foul was one where it could be red, could be yellow. He was off the ground and out of control so I tend towards red (it reminds me of Stones vs Villa which was also Red). But all thats up for debate. What isn't up for debate though is that it was not an obvious error by the referee so why was he asked to review it? The rules of VAR yet again tweaked to suit the occasion.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
Agreed. I was surprised it was a red to begin with. I thought going in toe-first rather than studs first showed how Trippier was trying to avoid injuring the player while still committing a “professional foul”. You could see Trippier telling Kev he was trying to avoid hurting him and Kev knew that I think. I can definitely see the other side — it COULD have been dangerous and maybe a red is needed just for “could haves” — but I agree with you. And this coming from me, still absolutely livid about Milner’s foul on Silva last year which was far more cynical, painful AND he was on a yellow. Of course I wanted Trippier gone but glad for the “game” writ large the card was reversed. I think the ref got it right in the end and TBH had a good game overall.
Click to expand...
What difference does what Tirippier said afterwards or De Bruyne's reaction to what he said make in the punishment of the foul ? Anyone can say they didn't mean to hurt their opponent - makes no difference whatsoever.
 
TheBlueDune said:
Law 12: FOULS AND MISCONDUCT

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.



Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball.

Trippier attempted to use excessive force when not challenging for the ball.
Made no attempt to get the ball.
Only aim was to stop KDB.
Knee height brutality.
RED CARD
Click to expand...
It really wasn’t excessive force. There wasn’t really much force in it at all, it was a slight kick to the side of the leg. The force used was negligible. Definite yellow card.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dickie davies said:
Stones' sending off vs Villa after a VAR review

Sky Sports - Sports News, Transfers, Scores | Watch Live Sport

Watch the best live coverage of your favourite sports: Football, Golf, Rugby, Cricket, Tennis, F1, Boxing, plus the latest sports news, transfers & scores.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com

Was this any different to Trippier's?
Click to expand...

Yeah it's pretty different. The amount of force and the fact he went with his studs up makes this a nailed on red.

When the replays of the Trippier foul came on, it seemed pretty obvious that it was more of a high trip than and out and out kick. Not much force and his studs pointed towards the ground.

The fact it was the knee makes it perfectly justifiable why Kev was initially so pissed off and I would understand if the red stood but it wasn't as bad as I first thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top