miac
TFF member
Posts: 122
|
Post by miac on Mar 1, 2010 10:02:53 GMT
Thats a fair point although if he had been sent off we would have been playing with ten men all second half anyway so his exclusion would not have made any difference !!!
|
|
|
|
Post by petergodfrey on Mar 1, 2010 10:05:34 GMT
Certainly enjoyed the fact that we won, Merse - it made up for being drowned out by the Irish in the Sun Inn ! I think it's just nerves because the margin between winning, losing, staying up and relegation seems so fine and we are all so desperate to see Gulls stay up. Anyway, on to the second of the two teams to really stuff us this season - let's hope we can turn Daggers over too.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrish on Mar 1, 2010 11:01:19 GMT
Well, Dagenham's away record for all their counter attacking ability and exciting wing play, isn't exactly amazing.
They've won 4, drawn 5 and lost 6 scoring only 14 goals and conceding 21.
I think we'll have a nice comfy 2-0 win. A Zebroski brace. You heard it here first.
|
|
miac
TFF member
Posts: 122
|
Post by miac on Mar 1, 2010 18:33:31 GMT
Yes I agree - no real need to start quaking over D and R. The division is full of average teams. We have to start viewing our home games as three point opportunities. There are no unbeatable teams here at all.
|
|
petef
Match Room Manager
Posts: 4,626
|
Post by petef on Mar 1, 2010 19:15:20 GMT
As soon as we can start playing "without fear" we will win more regularly.
|
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Mar 1, 2010 20:55:17 GMT
Much as I don't like getting on the backs of youngsters, Macklin and Rowe-Turner were very much the weak links.
I understand the concept of giving your opponent "food for thought", but Rowe-Turner's lunge was poor technique rather than canny psychology. I have seen players red-carded for such tackles and we couldn't have complained if he had walked.
Carlisle lifted the team when he came on - we have missed him so much. Let's hope we can manage his return to the team without risking anything by pushing him too far too fast.
Ellis and Branston played well but between them share responsibility for the goal that looked like it would cost us the win. There is no way that was down to Rowe-Turner - a ball pumped in from so far out should be dealt with by the centre backs.
Funnily enough, Bevan was excellent at Cheltenham but messed up for the goal. You can be excellent all game, but if you drop concentration for a split-second it can be costly.
The winner was a fluke and Barnes did look offside. You couldn't tell from what was shown on the telly - I'd love to see it again from a decent angle.
We've had more than our fair share of unluckies this season, so you can't compain about a bit of luck going our way. We worked hard throughout, so probably sort of deserved it.
Onwards and upwards (hopefully).
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Mar 1, 2010 22:07:15 GMT
I understand the concept of giving your opponent "food for thought", but Rowe-Turner's lunge was poor technique rather than canny psychology. I have seen players red-carded for such tackles and we couldn't have complained if he had walked. That was the point I was trying to make Jon and you have put it far better than I did, you only had to see the reaction of the Accrington players, their manager and their bench to know they felt it was a very bad tackle. Their manager ran onto the pitch as you will know when the game was over and the ref was standing by the center circle to express his views on that tackle and I expect our winning goal as well. |
|
|
|
Post by wrangatongulls on Mar 2, 2010 7:48:38 GMT
As I understand the offside rule(and I'm not sure i do) you only become offside when you touch the ball, well thats what a ref told me recently when i quieried it with him, as he handed me a flag to run the line. IF thats correct then the goal was fine as barnes didn't get to the ball. But if thats right it makes you wonder why so many offsides are given generally.
Regarding THE tackle we all(around me on the family stand) thought a straight red would be issued but didn't have the best view.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ditmar van Nostrilboy on Mar 2, 2010 14:37:39 GMT
As I understand the offside rule(and I'm not sure i do) you only become offside when you touch the ball, well thats what a ref told me recently when i quieried it with him, as he handed me a flag to run the line. IF thats correct then the goal was fine as barnes didn't get to the ball. But if thats right it makes you wonder why so many offsides are given generally. Regarding THE tackle we all(around me on the family stand) thought a straight red would be issued but didn't have the best view. Does anyone understand the offside rule nowadays after all the damn tinkering that goes on with it? As i understand it the player has to be "active" to be judged offside. As Barnes was battling with 2 defenders to get a foot on the ball that would make him active. However, what you cant tell from the highlights, and i couldnt tell from being by the halfway line at the match, was if Barnes was in line with the defenders when the ball was played forward by Robbo (i think?). If he was and reacted quicker than the defenders to get goal side then no, he wasnt offside. Being by the halfway line, I had a good close view of THE tackle. Ive seen worse tackles than that not be given a red card, just as i have seen "better" tackles get a red. Most of it seems to boil down to the ref on the day and his interpretation of intent. Personally, i thought it looked worse than it was, but thats just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by wrangatongulls on Mar 2, 2010 15:58:31 GMT
I was behind the goal and he looked to be a country mile offside when the ball was played foward, as soon as the ball went in I looked straight at the linesman, no flag, so started cheering and whooping it up and generally behaving like a child, and to be fair it felt good !
|
|
