Spurs post match
- Thread starter SaddleworthBlueRhino
- Start date
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
SPIDERBOY said:
Anyone know why the king of Spain's old fella was at this particular game?
To pay his respects to Silva.
wahablue said:
Ah yes, just looked that up v Everton in December 1957
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20121117075520AAedvFg
First one in my City watching lifetime though (since 1974), I think ?
The fact that Ken Barnes scored all 3 as well, whereas now you would probably expect at least 1 to be missed as on Saturday.
Thanks
BluessinceHydeRoad
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 2,562
Apart from Sergio's performance much of the post match comment now seems to be concerned with the penalties and City's first goal. The "debate" about Lampard's part in the first goal can be dismissed as so much rubbish, but the questions about the penalties are rather more serious. They were described as "controversial" but then this metamorphosed into "wrong", and what it actually shows is that the anti-City agenda is still alive and...well...kicking.
Penalty number 1 is actually not a debate about a penalty at all, but part of the campaign to turn Lampard from cockney hero to Mancunian cheat. There was contact, but nowhere near enough to bring Lampard down, so the argument goes, and so the penalty was "wrong". If this was said about Stoke's penalty yesterday, I would probably agree - but the force of the contact required to prevent a player playing the ball in the way he would have played it without the contact (this is the issue rather than "bringing a player down") is a matter of judgement, and the referee was excellently placed when one examines the highlights on the OS. The referee's judgement appears to be that Lampard was not poleaxed - he never behaves as though he was - but he was impeded and prevented from playing the ball. The decision may have varied from ref to ref, but it was not wrong.
There has been no controversy about the second penalty, but that is hardly surprising. Their penalty doesn't appear to have stirred up anywhere near the fuss surrounding ours, but that's because the press want to show City as the beneficiaries of favourable refereeing rather than Spurs. Replays show clearly that the trip was outside the area. Replays the ref couldn't watch. This was the one for which he was not actually well placed to judge because it was "on the edge" of the area and he got it wrong. I can't be too harsh on him because Martin knew exactly what he was doing and where, and Soldado (?) was clear in our area and the very likely outcome was a clear scoring opportunity.
The fourth of the game does not, again, centre on the penalty, but on the red card, which "finished the game off." It was a clear penalty, the red card was "controversial" but it was not "wrong". For once Shearer got it right - as soon as Jesus's pass cleared Younis Kaboul the red card was spot on. My own view is that the defender committing the infringement makes the ref's mind up for him: if it isn't a clear goal-scoring opportunity why did you do it?! Again the ref was ideally placed, saw it clearly and had no hesitation probably basing his judgement on the logic that Sergio would get the ball 5 yards outside an open goal and that that constitutes a clear goal-scoring opportunity.
I thought the ref had a good game. In addition to these "controversial" decisions he showed an admirable willingness to allow "robust" challenges, as long as there were no studs showing, the ball was the aim of the tackle and there was no genuine recklessness or lack of control. It began with the tackle on Fernando that led to Spurs' equaliser but it permitted a real beauty from Milner, still in the first half, and in general he didn't stop the game every time someone laddered their tights! It was a refreshing change to life at the Emirates where the game has to stop every time an Arsenal arm is raised. Having said that, isn't it a surprise that Arsenal weren't always allowed to referee their match on Saturday!!!
Penalty number 1 is actually not a debate about a penalty at all, but part of the campaign to turn Lampard from cockney hero to Mancunian cheat. There was contact, but nowhere near enough to bring Lampard down, so the argument goes, and so the penalty was "wrong". If this was said about Stoke's penalty yesterday, I would probably agree - but the force of the contact required to prevent a player playing the ball in the way he would have played it without the contact (this is the issue rather than "bringing a player down") is a matter of judgement, and the referee was excellently placed when one examines the highlights on the OS. The referee's judgement appears to be that Lampard was not poleaxed - he never behaves as though he was - but he was impeded and prevented from playing the ball. The decision may have varied from ref to ref, but it was not wrong.
There has been no controversy about the second penalty, but that is hardly surprising. Their penalty doesn't appear to have stirred up anywhere near the fuss surrounding ours, but that's because the press want to show City as the beneficiaries of favourable refereeing rather than Spurs. Replays show clearly that the trip was outside the area. Replays the ref couldn't watch. This was the one for which he was not actually well placed to judge because it was "on the edge" of the area and he got it wrong. I can't be too harsh on him because Martin knew exactly what he was doing and where, and Soldado (?) was clear in our area and the very likely outcome was a clear scoring opportunity.
The fourth of the game does not, again, centre on the penalty, but on the red card, which "finished the game off." It was a clear penalty, the red card was "controversial" but it was not "wrong". For once Shearer got it right - as soon as Jesus's pass cleared Younis Kaboul the red card was spot on. My own view is that the defender committing the infringement makes the ref's mind up for him: if it isn't a clear goal-scoring opportunity why did you do it?! Again the ref was ideally placed, saw it clearly and had no hesitation probably basing his judgement on the logic that Sergio would get the ball 5 yards outside an open goal and that that constitutes a clear goal-scoring opportunity.
I thought the ref had a good game. In addition to these "controversial" decisions he showed an admirable willingness to allow "robust" challenges, as long as there were no studs showing, the ball was the aim of the tackle and there was no genuine recklessness or lack of control. It began with the tackle on Fernando that led to Spurs' equaliser but it permitted a real beauty from Milner, still in the first half, and in general he didn't stop the game every time someone laddered their tights! It was a refreshing change to life at the Emirates where the game has to stop every time an Arsenal arm is raised. Having said that, isn't it a surprise that Arsenal weren't always allowed to referee their match on Saturday!!!
BluessinceHydeRoad
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 2,562
City1974 said:
God, yes, I remember seeing that -a 6-2 win for the blues and Dave Hickson was sent off? I remember a match at home to Blackpool (in the same season?) which we won 4-3 at Maine Road, where there were a lot of penalties, though I know Ken missed one that day.
BluessinceHydeRoad
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 2,562
aguero93:20 said:SPIDERBOY said:
Anyone know why the king of Spain's old fella was at this particular game?
To pay his respects to Silva.
He abdicated, now he has nowhere to live and has heard there might be a bedroom going at the CFA.
Graceyboy
Well-Known Member
BluessinceHydeRoad said:aguero93:20 said:SPIDERBOY said:
Anyone know why the king of Spain's old fella was at this particular game?
To pay his respects to Silva.
He abdicated, now he has nowhere to live and has heard there might be a bedroom going at the CFA.
Maybe Spain want to sponsor City
Citizen of Legoland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 9,971
Sheikh Mansour went to Spain,Graceyboy said:
In a lambourghini,
Brought us back a manager,
And the King of Spain ('s dad).
Hmmm, needs a bit of work.
TueartsOHK
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 2,522
- Location
- Denton to West Midlands
- Team supported
- Citizens of Hope and Glory
Don Howe said:
Can't open this link Don - internal server error