Jump to content

Tractor shaggers match thread


Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Owling_Wolf said:

 

Yeah but this is us we're talking about.

"Is it ok if we use your clip in tomorrow's edition of The Fail / Times if we credit you?"

The fail wouldn't ask. They'd just do it, then put some slur in about the Hillsborough disaster even though we played in Suffolk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HoylandOwl said:

The fail wouldn't ask. They'd just do it, then put some slur in about the Hillsborough disaster even though we played in Suffolk.

"...was severely injured by the Wednesday player thrashing his elbows about as if he was trapped in the recent crush at..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Owling_Wolf said:

Whilst I agree about our donation of ridiculous free kicks I can't possibly agree with two other comments in the above posts.  The back three were not excellent: for a substantial chunk of the 2nd half Iorfa was seriously struggling, both with his leg injury and his composure. Many clearances were wildly hit straight to Ipswich or headed straight up in the air: certainly not directed to or near a colleague.  Similarly Famewo lost his head for a while and was hurrying and scuffing clearances, losing possession and ending up on the wrong side of his man: having to chase him to the goal line.  It was particularly easy to spot as the song with his name in it that was otherwise being sung all game simply stopped for about 15 or 20 minutes. Thankfully, after the worst of their 2nd half onslaught had passed, our defence eventually got their mojo back and our normal service (and singing!) resumed.  

We "comfortably achieved" a point? No we did not.  We were excellent for 40 mins in the first half but, after that, there was nothing comfortable about what followed. Apart from five minutes or so late on spent in or around their area I've not seen us as thoroughly UNcomfortable for such a long spell in a game for months.  

What I mean by comfortable, was that they didn’t trouble Dawson enough, we were very much under the cosh, for all of the possession they had inside 30 yards, there wasn’t much in the way of clear cut chances. We did a fairly good of keeping them at arms length, I can only think of twice in the whole game where they got behind the back three, and on both occasions we cut the cross out.

Just on the difference in the second half, in the first half, the Ipswich full backs were the issue, bad without and without the ball. That actually allowed Bannan to push right up against Morsy and then led to Ipswich just banging it down the throat of our back three. In fact, Palmer almost ended up as a proper wide midfield player in the first half which also allowed Bannan freedom of the pitch pretty much unchecked. The big change was pushing the full backs right up, which pushed Palmer back, and then it created overloads on our left which then ended up with is playing a back five and a flat three in midfield, Bannan dropped into a left sided role, it then meant that Windass was trying to stand on Morsy, but chasing back to do so. 

The person who would have made the biggest difference would have been Malik Wilks. Because he drifts wide, he would have occupied one of the Ipswich wide players. Our lack of attacking options on the bench hurt us a bit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, KrolMong said:

What I mean by comfortable, was that they didn’t trouble Dawson enough, we were very much under the cosh, for all of the possession they had inside 30 yards, there wasn’t much in the way of clear cut chances. We did a fairly good of keeping them at arms length, I can only think of twice in the whole game where they got behind the back three, and on both occasions we cut the cross out.

Just on the difference in the second half, in the first half, the Ipswich full backs were the issue, bad without and without the ball. That actually allowed Bannan to push right up against Morsy and then led to Ipswich just banging it down the throat of our back three. In fact, Palmer almost ended up as a proper wide midfield player in the first half which also allowed Bannan freedom of the pitch pretty much unchecked. The big change was pushing the full backs right up, which pushed Palmer back, and then it created overloads on our left which then ended up with is playing a back five and a flat three in midfield, Bannan dropped into a left sided role, it then meant that Windass was trying to stand on Morsy, but chasing back to do so. 

The person who would have made the biggest difference would have been Malik Wilks. Because he drifts wide, he would have occupied one of the Ipswich wide players. Our lack of attacking options on the bench hurt us a bit. 

Absolutely agree with the last bit.  First time I've missed Wilks!  

We could be very short of players for next week or two, especially if we get shit over Johnson.  Might have to use young 'uns off the bench. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Owling_Wolf said:

Absolutely agree with the last bit.  First time I've missed Wilks!  

We could be very short of players for next week or two, especially if we get shit over Johnson.  Might have to use young 'uns off the bench. 

Or we could be fine as James and Gregory likely back Tuesday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as for time wasting. How many years have we witnessed other teams doing it to us?

 

BTW, it's game management and thank fuck we're finally mastering it.

 

Well, it's game management when we're doing it. Time wasting if ...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Skamp said:

And as for time wasting. How many years have we witnessed other teams doing it to us?

 

BTW, it's game management and thank fuck we're finally mastering it.

 

Well, it's game management when we're doing it. Time wasting if ...

This

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve seen a vlog that an Ipswich fan did high in the stand behind where the pen was given and the part when Johnson fouls there lad looks completely a non incident. There lad is pulling Johnson back from going to the ball Johnson shrugs him/ pushes him away without taking his eye off the ball and their lad goes down like he’s been polaxed, in what I can only described as trying to make something out of nothing. 
The fact they took so long over it suggests they weren’t sure and probably couldn’t figure out which of our players actually committed the foul, which might be the problem for us. However, if the EFL decide they can use home fans footage of incidents that seems to me like a very slippery slope to head down - given the ability of people to manipulate videos these days.

So, shouldn’t have been a pen because it was an Ipswich player being a drama queen and trying to make something from nothing and if Johnson is retrospectively banned the club need to push back big time, which on recent form would seem likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, KrolMong said:

The person who would have made the biggest difference would have been Malik Wilks. Because he drifts wide, he would have occupied one of the Ipswich wide players. Our lack of attacking options on the bench hurt us a bit. 

 

4 hours ago, Owling_Wolf said:

Absolutely agree with the last bit.  First time I've missed Wilks!  

We could be very short of players for next week or two, especially if we get shit over Johnson.  Might have to use young 'uns off the bench. 

What was the point of Shipston and Fusire being on the bench if they weren't an option to be used? Fusire could have played the Wilks role and with a confidence born out of youth and a good performance at Fleetwood. We could have even thrown Brown further forward (as we did at points last season) to inject some pace and push one of full backs back. We didn't do either 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Reesh said:

Or we could be fine as James and Gregory likely back Tuesday.

I’d agree, from what DM said post match they should be in contention but equally I can see him being careful with them and anyone else that is teetering on the edge of fatigue or an injury.

Yes we want to put our strongest team out on the pitch but losing a player for one games is better than losing them for the season. The next two games would be easier to accommodate a player that’s not a first choice player compared to when we play the dingles and Notlob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skamp said:

And as for time wasting. How many years have we witnessed other teams doing it to us?

 

BTW, it's game management and thank fuck we're finally mastering it.

 

Well, it's game management when we're doing it. Time wasting if ...

If it's passing from full back to centre back to full back and repeat and repeat, or keeping it in the corner: it's game management. As is kicking it into row Z.

If it's feigning injury or taking 30 seconds over a goal kick: that's time wasting. I don't think we do a lot of the later, especially in the absence of Stockdale and Paterson.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s a video clip on the WTID twitter which shows the penalty incident. Johnson looks to elbow the Ipswich player but it looks like it’s more like in his ribs, not in his face and it’s more like a shrug their player off. So it could be argued a pen was warranted if a player pushing someone off that is trying to grab you. Bloody officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Skamp said:

And as for time wasting. How many years have we witnessed other teams doing it to us?

 

BTW, it's game management and thank fuck we're finally mastering it.

 

Well, it's game management when we're doing it. Time wasting if ...

My only comment on that is Vaulks got a stupid yellow before HT doing said game management. 

With both him and then Byers on yellows from early on in the 2nd it helped them retain possession a lot easier and thus detrimental

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would have been interesting to see the Lino's decision if Johnson had hit the floor as Burns wrapped his arms round him but, as a defender and where it happened you can't take that chance it'll be seen. 

In today's game you can't throw your arms out as it gives the officials the opportunity to make a decision. Johnson should have broke free, then bided his time and twatted him further up the pitch. 

Edited by Tylluan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/02/2023 at 08:55, mkowlthesexynewversion said:

Well a decision was made in game, the one official camera its not clear what happened. Clearly the crowd angles show it was a bit naughty, but that would be VAR on another level.

Johnson was stupid as it could have been a red if the ref had seen it properly 

I like this squad and that we are tougher these days, but not when it's rash. The stupid free kicks we give away around the box have cost us big time once we come up against decent quality

Sorry pal, had to wait until on the PC to reply, it's a nightmare trying to do it on the mobile.

Don't know whether anybody has said this but, like you say...

It was seen by the officials and a penalty given, with no following card.

So it should be the end of the matter there and then, with no other process to follow because as the law makers say, we cannot look at the matter if a decision has been made by the officials.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is bollocks because the main camera at the ground does not really show it clearly. The defence will be the officials "saw" the incident but not who did it, and the TV evidence merely confirms the identity.

But it is a very dangerous precedent if this is any way being determined  by social media. Because let's be clear we have several thousand more phones with phones that could capture incidents.

What is to stop me rocking up at Plymouth trying to film potential incidents and then sending them on to the FA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Neville Facking Bartos said:

I’ve no issue with it, was always expecting it but I think there’s a chance they’ll not find the evidence conclusive enough for the charge he faces 

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mkowlthesexynewversion said:

It is bollocks because the main camera at the ground does not really show it clearly. The defence will be the officials "saw" the incident but not who did it, and the TV evidence merely confirms the identity.

But it is a very dangerous precedent if this is any way being determined  by social media. Because let's be clear we have several thousand more phones with phones that could capture incidents.

What is to stop me rocking up at Plymouth trying to film potential incidents and then sending them on to the FA.

Cos you're not a sad cu.....

 

Yeah good point.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Neville Facking Bartos said:

I’ve no issue with it, was always expecting it but I think there’s a chance they’ll not find the evidence conclusive enough for the charge he faces 

When have you ever known anyone walk away from a disciplinary meeting Scot free?

He's already been charged with violent and/or improper conduct so they must be confident with the evidence they've got. If we're successful against the violent charge then they just hit him with the lesser improper. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely, utterly scandalous. Should have obviously been a free kick to us for him being repeatedly pulled back. All he tried to do - as shown by the fan clip behind the goal - was shrug off the fouler. He never even turned round to see where he was!  

This is nothing more than an opportunist, illicit 'punishment' for having got up the noses of the authorities for showing them up over their minions' rule breaking conduct in denying the goal properly scored against Plymouth, and how they reached that other, scandalous, wrong decision. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point that people on social media etc are missing as they don’t have knowledge of Fa disciplinaries is that you are guilty until proven innocent. So they have charged with the offence and we will not get away with it as it happened and the efl have charged so no defence will work so ban incoming Im afraid.

it’s the same in grassroots and I have experience of it. Still considering writing a book 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They ‘didn’t know who it was’ shows how absolutely absurd it is too. 

While there was a decision made at the game, they got a pen, the officials saw enough to deem it a penalty but the lino couldn’t see who it was? How did he see it happen in the first place then with any certainty?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marv should request the evidence and if a gap toothed yokel rolls up with his sister girlfriend holding an iPhone he should release the info to the public. He'd get an extra ban but trial by some sore loser in the crowd is taking the piss.

Guilty or not we cant't be judging on fucking fan cam. Nowt gets said when ITV/ BBC/ Sky discuss similar.

It's definitely a mark on our card for speaking out about big screen VAR

Edited by Ozzie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, EastCraigsOwl said:

No point in challenging it.

If this charge was dropped you can guarantee a referee will send him off in an upcoming match, for tripping over his boot laces or another equally non-sendoffable offence.

Heard somewhere that if we put in a plea of guilty today he could be banned for tomorrow. Sure that’s what was said on Twitter somewhere

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...