Spurs post match

[lasereyes]

That's a very shrewd assessment but the phrase " a better side than Spurs" ?

Spurs are hoping for a Champions League spot, I don't think they will get it but they will come very close come May. Therefore, their aren't many better sides in the Premiership than Spurs and we won easily with a shoddy defensive performance, players missing and being very wasteful in front of goal.

Another point; how weird is this split opinion on Sagna - half seem to think he played very well and the other half think he was gash.

He played well, but he's gash compared to our Zaba.

I think we need to give Sagna a bit of time. Don't forget he's not used to playing football, at this high level ;-)

Sagna has been very solid defensively in every game he has played. He does not have the same attacking threat as Zabba, but that's a totally unfair comparison. Would you compare Messi's backup to Messi?

And I do think Sagna will improve going forward as he plays more in our system. Already, he is starting to contribute as you can see from his role in the first goal.

Big upgrade on Micah (sadly) IMO.

 

[lasereyes]

just watched some of the game back, i dont usually have the luxury of listening to the BT coverage. anyone doubting the agenda tune in to mini me and the guy with him. hatred for our club. total hatred.

They are the same every match,owen and darke hate us for sure,always want us to lose

Must admit, I had to laugh today as they found fault with every single goal.

1. Lampard was deemed 'offside' for the first (without BT being able to show a single corroborative camera angle), cos he jumped out of the way of the ball. Well given that that ball wound up in the far corner of the net, and given that Lloris's starting position was covering his near post, it would be physically impossible for Frankie to have been in the keeper's direct line of sight. Fucking cretins!
2. The first penalty was given incorrectly, despite replays clearly showing Lamps being bumped over from behind. Soft maybe, incorrect no.
3. Sergio wasn't denied a clear goal scoring opportunity, because there were a 'lot of bodies' in the box. Say what now? Kaboul failed to cut out Navas's pull back, and Sergio was steaming in a yard ahead of the other defender to knock it in, when he was dragged back. Depends on your definition of 'clear' I suppose, but it looked a fully justifiable red card to me.
4. According to ikkle Mickey, Sergio's 4th was a deflection. Well, if it did deviate off line - and it didn't - you'd have needed a NASA approved telescope and sextant to notice it.

Just enjoy their salty tears

I thought someone would post this. Simple response: Newcastle at St James last year. Their goal was disallowed in pretty similar circumstances (prompting Pardew's famous half time outburst to MP). The overwhelming view on this forum at the time was that Gouffran by being in the vicinity of the goal was interfering and the ref's decision was correct. If you took that view then, to argue differently on Lampard (and he was actually much more directly in line with the shot) is inconsistent and non-credible.

My view is Newcastle's was offside and so was ours yesterday. I don't think it affected the result of the game, but let's be honest - we got a break there. You can't use that as evidence of an "agenda".

 

[bluwes]

Anyone know why the king of Spain's old fella was at this particular game?

Hasn't he just taken over as cricket coach at Lancs

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

They are the same every match,owen and darke hate us for sure,always want us to lose

Must admit, I had to laugh today as they found fault with every single goal.

1. Lampard was deemed 'offside' for the first (without BT being able to show a single corroborative camera angle), cos he jumped out of the way of the ball. Well given that that ball wound up in the far corner of the net, and given that Lloris's starting position was covering his near post, it would be physically impossible for Frankie to have been in the keeper's direct line of sight. Fucking cretins!
2. The first penalty was given incorrectly, despite replays clearly showing Lamps being bumped over from behind. Soft maybe, incorrect no.
3. Sergio wasn't denied a clear goal scoring opportunity, because there were a 'lot of bodies' in the box. Say what now? Kaboul failed to cut out Navas's pull back, and Sergio was steaming in a yard ahead of the other defender to knock it in, when he was dragged back. Depends on your definition of 'clear' I suppose, but it looked a fully justifiable red card to me.
4. According to ikkle Mickey, Sergio's 4th was a deflection. Well, if it did deviate off line - and it didn't - you'd have needed a NASA approved telescope and sextant to notice it.

Just enjoy their salty tears

I thought someone would post this. Simple response: Newcastle at St James last year. Their goal was disallowed in pretty similar circumstances (prompting Pardew's famous half time outburst to MP). The overwhelming view on this forum at the time was that Gouffran by being in the vicinity of the goal was interfering and the ref's decision was correct. If you took that view then, to argue differently on Lampard (and he was actually much more directly in line with the shot) is inconsistent and non-credible.

My view is Newcastle's was offside and so was ours yesterday. I don't think it affected the result of the game, but let's be honest - we got a break there. You can't use that as evidence of an "agenda".

I can't agree. Lampard is in n offside position but he is standing at the extreme edge of the six yard box, well outside the left post. Sergio shot from even further outside the left post and Lamps was not in LLoris's line of sight. The referee can see this perfectly from where he is. Sergio shot to put the ball in by the right post, which he did. At no time was Lamps ever interfering with the 'keepers line of site or ability to stop the shot, which was always going away from Lampard, who was never playing an active part in the play. What was different at Newcastle was not Gouffran's proximity to the goal, but his proximity to the ball and to Joe Hart which meant he was active, because he exercised an influence on Joe's judgement. The circumstances were not "pretty similar" but totally different. Simple response.

 

[Vic]

Must admit, I had to laugh today as they found fault with every single goal.

1. Lampard was deemed 'offside' for the first (without BT being able to show a single corroborative camera angle), cos he jumped out of the way of the ball. Well given that that ball wound up in the far corner of the net, and given that Lloris's starting position was covering his near post, it would be physically impossible for Frankie to have been in the keeper's direct line of sight. Fucking cretins!
2. The first penalty was given incorrectly, despite replays clearly showing Lamps being bumped over from behind. Soft maybe, incorrect no.
3. Sergio wasn't denied a clear goal scoring opportunity, because there were a 'lot of bodies' in the box. Say what now? Kaboul failed to cut out Navas's pull back, and Sergio was steaming in a yard ahead of the other defender to knock it in, when he was dragged back. Depends on your definition of 'clear' I suppose, but it looked a fully justifiable red card to me.
4. According to ikkle Mickey, Sergio's 4th was a deflection. Well, if it did deviate off line - and it didn't - you'd have needed a NASA approved telescope and sextant to notice it.

Just enjoy their salty tears

I thought someone would post this. Simple response: Newcastle at St James last year. Their goal was disallowed in pretty similar circumstances (prompting Pardew's famous half time outburst to MP). The overwhelming view on this forum at the time was that Gouffran by being in the vicinity of the goal was interfering and the ref's decision was correct. If you took that view then, to argue differently on Lampard (and he was actually much more directly in line with the shot) is inconsistent and non-credible.

My view is Newcastle's was offside and so was ours yesterday. I don't think it affected the result of the game, but let's be honest - we got a break there. You can't use that as evidence of an "agenda".

I can't agree. Lampard is in n offside position but he is standing at the extreme edge of the six yard box, well outside the left post. Sergio shot from even further outside the left post and Lamps was not in LLoris's line of sight. The referee can see this perfectly from where he is. Sergio shot to put the ball in by the right post, which he did. At no time was Lamps ever interfering with the 'keepers line of site or ability to stop the shot, which was always going away from Lampard, who was never playing an active part in the play. What was different at Newcastle was not Gouffran's proximity to the goal, but his proximity to the ball and to Joe Hart which meant he was active, because he exercised an influence on Joe's judgement. The circumstances were not "pretty similar" but totally different. Simple response.

Sorry, it's not simple. I was level with Lampard and at the time said I thought he was interfering and thus offside. From Lloris's POV Sergio is to the right of Lampard when he shoots, and the ball passes to the left of Lampard. The key question was whether Lampard, in an offside position, was "clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision". But the further out Lampard was, the less case for offside being given. We were lucky to get the decision at Newcastle; yesterday was fair enough by the standards of "obstructing vision" usually applied.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Sagna simply isn't up to our level, and I'm not sure he is young enough to get there.

Kompany was literally forced to play right back throughout the game, such was Sagna's inability to get up and down and provide the overlap with Navas.

I really don't mean to be on his case and I hope he comes good - it's early days him playing for us. But honestly, I haven't seen anything to give me encouragement and I don't mean just today. He's not been decent in any game yet. Defensively poor and offering absolutely zero going forward.

Sorry but that's just the way I see it.

You're writing him off after two league starts for us, when he's been consistently good over a prolonged spell for Arsenal?!

No Ric, I am not "writing him off", as in fact I say above.

 

[Marvin]

Watched the highlights on <a class="postlink" href="http://www.mcfc.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.mcfc.co.uk</a> and the foul on Lampard for the first penalty is very clear. Spurs defender used his right forearm to push Lampard over. And yet on MOTD and elsewhere in the media it was said not to be a penalty

Spurs manager said we had decisions in our favour. In fact it was the other way around. The only pen that should not have been given was their pen as it was outside the box.

Does this matter? maybe because the next time Lampard goes down or City have a penalty appeal, it might be in the back of the ref's mind.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Watched the highlights on <a class="postlink" href="http://www.mcfc.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mcfc.co.uk</a> and the foul on Lampard for the first penalty is very clear. Spurs defender used his right forearm to push Lampard over. And yet on MOTD and elsewhere in the media it was said not to be a penalty

Spurs manager said we had decisions in our favour. In fact it was the other way around. The only pen that should not have been given was their pen as it was outside the box.

Does this matter? maybe because the next time Lampard goes down or City have a penalty appeal, it might be in the back of the ref's mind.

That's exactly how I see it, Marvin. He definitely shoved Frank and knocked him over. Perhaps Frank could have stayed on his feet but he would have been stumbling at lost any chance, so he was fully entitled to fall over and a penalty was correctly awarded imho.

I am less convinced by the red card, it has to be said. But that really did not change the outcome of the game. At 3-1 up we were not going to throw it away, against 10 or 11 men. And it should have been 3-0 anyway at that point, since their's was never a penalty as you point out.

 

[Norbiton]

Um - they didn't score the penalty so it would still have been 3-1!

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

They are the same every match,owen and darke hate us for sure,always want us to lose

Must admit, I had to laugh today as they found fault with every single goal.

1. Lampard was deemed 'offside' for the first (without BT being able to show a single corroborative camera angle), cos he jumped out of the way of the ball. Well given that that ball wound up in the far corner of the net, and given that Lloris's starting position was covering his near post, it would be physically impossible for Frankie to have been in the keeper's direct line of sight. Fucking cretins!
2. The first penalty was given incorrectly, despite replays clearly showing Lamps being bumped over from behind. Soft maybe, incorrect no.
3. Sergio wasn't denied a clear goal scoring opportunity, because there were a 'lot of bodies' in the box. Say what now? Kaboul failed to cut out Navas's pull back, and Sergio was steaming in a yard ahead of the other defender to knock it in, when he was dragged back. Depends on your definition of 'clear' I suppose, but it looked a fully justifiable red card to me.
4. According to ikkle Mickey, Sergio's 4th was a deflection. Well, if it did deviate off line - and it didn't - you'd have needed a NASA approved telescope and sextant to notice it.

Just enjoy their salty tears

I thought someone would post this. Simple response: Newcastle at St James last year. Their goal was disallowed in pretty similar circumstances (prompting Pardew's famous half time outburst to MP). The overwhelming view on this forum at the time was that Gouffran by being in the vicinity of the goal was interfering and the ref's decision was correct. If you took that view then, to argue differently on Lampard (and he was actually much more directly in line with the shot) is inconsistent and non-credible.

My view is Newcastle's was offside and so was ours yesterday. I don't think it affected the result of the game, but let's be honest - we got a break there. You can't use that as evidence of an "agenda".

The difference was that Hart stuttered briefly as he saw Gouffran, and appealed for the offside directly afterwards. Lloris did neither for the simple reason he could see, and more importantly, was not distracted by Lampard in the slightest.