Jump to content

Plymuff's Pilgrimage to S6


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, mkowlthesexynewversion said:

A deserved win and good to see Moore reads on here and agreed that playing Bannan, Byers and Vaulks is a terrific idea. Barring injuries and the FA Cup then that must be the plan for the rest of the season.

Choke the opposition in their own half like we did in the first half. Keep them more than at arms length in the 2nd. 

Don't give these teams a chance to hurt you and to me we look more threatening when less is more striker wise, as our wing backs come more into it. I guess I have to eat a large slice of humble pie on Paterson.

The joke of the ref though,  first half did not notice him really, but 2nd I am sure he wanted 33k to do so on his own big day out. 

The 2nd goal was just bizarre, one of their players was injured so he gave instruction for the trainers to come on. May be a form of excuse for the delay. Clearly neither official will admit to watching the screen to wriggle out of how they made the decision.

The other call for football is to limit injury assessment to 2 minutes. If that call is its a serious one, then treatment continues on the pitch of course but others should be moved to the touchline.

18 minutes of announced injury time (and more played) is getting beyond a joke. 

I had that discussion with the 2 mates 'live' both times when the sign was held up. They were saying 9 mins in 1st half was unjustified but I disagreed.  Both Scarr & Cooper were down & having treatment / assessment for long periods. They obviously wouldn't have wanted to have lost the latter: he really is top quality.  In addition, Palmer also had rec'd treatment that half, so 9 mins including the 2 substitutions was easily justified.

However, when they also objected to the 10 mins added at the end of the game I joined in this time. Yes, players had rec'd treatment - Baz plus the lad down when Byers 'scored', just off the top - but I can't remember any really extended treatment like in the 1st half.  How many substitutions, though, at 30 secs each.  If the maximum was used by both, that's 8 so 4 mins.  I wonder if the minute or so for our 'goal' was added on. 

Edited by Owling_Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, HoylandOwl said:

Keith Hackett has his say on the ‘goal’ that wasn’t.

Even if it is mentioned by the PGMOL to the ref. We won’t hear anything of it. It’ll be kept in house. 

Obviously.  File under, 'It's a swizz!'   🤬

Just pause for a moment and think how we'd have been feeling now if things had gone on to end differently - if that utter disgrace had caused us to actually drop points and a place in the table. It really doesn't bear thinking about.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Owling_Wolf said:

Obviously.  File under, 'It's a swizz!'   🤬

Just pause for a moment and think how we'd have been feeling now if things had gone on to end differently - if that utter disgrace had caused us to actually drop points and a place in the table. It really doesn't bear thinking about.  

As much as really, they only clipped that shot onto the roof of the net. They didn't do much more. But there's no doubt, the 'chalking off' of the goal, invigorated them as we were all over them like a rash before that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, lyn_owl said:

I think SWFC should hold off with the "Instant Replay" in future, until all goals are confirmed

The thing is, there was no reason for it to be chalked off, for 30 seconds. Which to me, is long enough for the goal to be shown on screen. 

Also, I think the scoreboard is externally controlled. Hence the mistakes that happen from time to time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't a similar thing happen in the play off game against Brighton?

A Forestieri goal got ruled out?

I think it was the right decision in the end but talk them was it was disallowed after the officials saw the goal on the big screen 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, JBO said:

Didn't a similar thing happen in the play off game against Brighton?

A Forestieri goal got ruled out?

I think it was the right decision in the end but talk them was it was disallowed after the officials saw the goal on the big screen 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, there was a through ball that brushed Hooper on the way through I think. You would think they'd learn and not put the replays on until after it has kicked off again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kaveman said:

Yeah, there was a through ball that brushed Hooper on the way through I think. You would think they'd learn and not put the replays on until after it has kicked off again.

Hardly the same. And how long do you wait, it was almost a minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HoylandOwl said:

 

The thing is, there was no reason for it to be chalked off, for 30 seconds. Which to me, is long enough for the goal to be shown on screen. 

Also, I think the scoreboard is externally controlled. Hence the mistakes that happen from time to time.

It can't be allowed again, mate. Not unless / until there's one wrongly awarded against us!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the disallowed goal: I was on the North, towards the kop and, although Gregory jumped to avoid the ball hitting him, it passed between him and the keeper. In no way was Gregory impeding the keeper’s view, and it’s a hard push to say he prevented a dive. A clear goal for me.

But my celebration was muted as I saw the linesman stood still. I thought that he was sure LG was beyond the last defender, but unsure whether he was interfering with play. So I think he did what he should do, and got the ref to decide. Can’t say I noticed either looking at the replay on the screen. 
 

Something else happened in the match that I don’t think hasn’t happened for some time. We scored from a throw-in. Usually, our throw-ins result in rapid loss of possession, but wow, we scored from one. When was the last time? 
 

Has there been any word on why Famewo didn’t play? He’s going to be needed until James comes back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I imagining this, but wasn’t there a ruling that the attacking team should get the benefit of the doubt when it’s marginal/ unclear, with the idea it will mean there might be more goals? I mean since the initiation of VAR that seems to have taken a knock.

Anyway, if there was ever a case, yesterday was one.

The other thing for me is the angle of the picture from cameras that provide the big screen highlights really don’t help our case because you can’t judge the perspective, ie whether Gregory is in the eyeline of their keeper, certainly compared to the video of the lad on the kop where it’s clearer that he isn’t really. The fact Gregory is in an offside position is irrelevant as has been shown time again with the new offside interpretations.

Transparency of the referee’s reviews of these kinds of decisions would at least show how things are reviewed and what can be learnt.

Edited by Tank_Owl2,0
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, M42Owl said:

On the disallowed goal: I was on the North, towards the kop and, although Gregory jumped to avoid the ball hitting him, it passed between him and the keeper. In no way was Gregory impeding the keeper’s view, and it’s a hard push to say he prevented a dive. A clear goal for me.

But my celebration was muted as I saw the linesman stood still. I thought that he was sure LG was beyond the last defender, but unsure whether he was interfering with play. So I think he did what he should do, and got the ref to decide. Can’t say I noticed either looking at the replay on the screen. 
 

Something else happened in the match that I don’t think hasn’t happened for some time. We scored from a throw-in. Usually, our throw-ins result in rapid loss of possession, but wow, we scored from one. When was the last time? 
 

Has there been any word on why Famewo didn’t play? He’s going to be needed until James comes back.

DM said Famewo was rested bc he’s trained and played to the max since his return and was sore, so they were giving him a chance to recover.

I don’t know what it was but I sensed something when he was asked about Famewo on Friday. I was still surprised he wasn’t playing and Paterson was also in the RWB slot, but DM proved right on both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, mkowlthesexynewversion said:

I think Famewo will play Tuesday night 

Be interesting if any of the starting XI Saturday start that match. Certainly wouldn't be putting any of the midfield in. 

First names on the team sheet for Tuesday night should be the outfield players that were on the bench on Saturday - including Brown. 

Dawson

Palmer Flint Famewo

Hunt Brown

Dennis FDB Bakinson

Wilks Gregory

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Tank_Owl2,0 said:

Am I imagining this, but wasn’t there a ruling that the attacking team should get the benefit of the doubt when it’s marginal/ unclear, with the idea it will mean there might be more goals? I mean since the initiation of VAR that seems to have taken a knock.

and the rule about a player going off at the nearest point on the touchline when being subsituted

everyone now just wanders over to the dugouts from wherever they are on the pitch

Edited by HarrySpeakup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HarrySpeakup said:

and the rule about a player going off at the nearest point on the touchline when being subsituted

everyone now just wanders over to the dugouts from wherever they are on the pitch

Funnily enough, I think it was a Tottenham player yesterday who got shunted towards the nearest pitch edge when he was getting subbed late on.

I thought, "not seen that for a while".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hirstys 12th Pint said:

First names on the team sheet for Tuesday night should be the outfield players that were on the bench on Saturday - including Brown. 

Dawson

Palmer Flint Famewo

Hunt Brown

Dennis FDB Bakinson

Wilks Gregory

 

 

I would not disagree with that team. Perhaps give Stockdale a game. If I could find a way of resting Palmer and Flint, I would. We want Palmer, Flint and Iorfa fit for Saturday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been sent footage of a bit of handbags taking place what looks like to the side of the Lepp by the river. Can't tell if it's pre or post game but there doesn't look many there. 

One Muppet kicks his leg out and his intended victim catches it and makes him hop about a bit. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Tylluan said:

Been sent footage of a bit of handbags taking place what looks like to the side of the Lepp by the river. Can't tell if it's pre or post game but there doesn't look many there. 

One Muppet kicks his leg out and his intended victim catches it and makes him hop about a bit. 

 

That should be set to the music from the chase scenes at the end of the Benny Hill Show.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tylluan said:

Been sent footage of a bit of handbags taking place what looks like to the side of the Lepp by the river. Can't tell if it's pre or post game but there doesn't look many there. 

One Muppet kicks his leg out and his intended victim catches it and makes him hop about a bit. 

 

Is that the Devon Pastie v Yorkshire Pudding Tic Toc ??  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Hirstys 12th Pint said:

 

Half Pint just sent it me.  Not embarrassing in the slightest.

Please delete if glorifying 'violence' !!

 

What in fucking gods name is that!

As mi grandad would’ve said.. couldn’t knock the skin off a rice pudding 

want banning for the sheer embarrassment 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Made a point of tuning into Sky Sports for Ref Watch. 

Spent forever on City FFP and Casemiro, eventually went down the leagues and "We're running out of time but a quick word on the Plymouth v Wednesday"

Gregory was offside (he wasn't) as long as they get to the right decision (they didn't) it doesn't matter how long it takes. Totally ignored the presenters question of em using the their screen.

Dunno why they bother with Gallagher as he contradicts himself over every decision but always backs the officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ozzie said:

He wasn't interfering or touched the ball so not offside.

It was an interesting one because at the ground - right side of the Kop - Gregory is further away from the keeper. The camera position foreshortens his proximity, the fan cam behind the goal is the best 

So old school that is offside but what we don't want is offside being given - like it used to be - if Gregory was 20 yards away from the direction the ball was travelling

Modern "interpretation" or called making up this bollocks as they go along its debatable 

So I am not annoyed that it was disallowed on technical grounds more how the ref and lino came to make their decision and the time taken

And like many others why VAR is detrimental to the spontaneity of football and serves a purpose purely for the armchair supporters 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...