|
Post by popinjay on Nov 18, 2007 10:08:06 GMT
Gareth, I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as an indirect free-kick any more. That said, I'm not sure it was even inside the area!
|
|
|
Post by willo on Nov 18, 2007 10:44:17 GMT
Strange team set up from the off always meant we'd be on a loser if we went behind. However, second half we looked a different side, especially Dundas, who put himself about and caused loads of problems. What a change to have someone with enthusiasm up front in contrast to the recent Watkins/Graham/McBean lack of efforts! Definitely worth leaving Sainsburys for, eh geez!!!
|
|
|
Post by sallycat on Nov 18, 2007 12:31:10 GMT
That was possibly the biggest contrast I've ever seen, or perhaps felt, between two halves of a game of football. When H&Y scored their first goal early on, I thought, "oh no, not again!" When they got the penalty soon afterwards, I thought "well that's it then." At half time, 3-0 down, I thought "we'll never get out of this"
Yet pretty much as soon as the second half started, I thought "Hmmm, if they can score three goals in half a game....we've still got another half to go!"
Instead of rolling over and admitting defeat as soon as we were behind, our lads showed some real fighting spirit right to the end. We haven't seen that sort of thing all season. And it paid off. The end was tense and I remember standing right behind the goal bouncing up and down like a cat on hot bricks going, "Come on Sutton...come on please...just one more!"
And when it happened, we absolutely exploded!
It may only be one point, but it's a point. And that is better than anything we've seen for the last six weeks!
|
|
|
Post by suttonview on Nov 18, 2007 14:24:29 GMT
Strange how games of football can change. It was only because Nicky Greene made a total mess of his first time shot, that he got the chance to recover and score and then we never looked back. I was near the players' tunnel at the end and if you'd heard Preddie screaming, shouting and chucking things as he went off the pitch at the end, you could tell he certainly was not a happy bunny ! Let's hope we can maintain the momentum next week, because Dover away is likely to be very hard. They may be 2 leagues below us, but are top and have only lost one league game all season. They had 900 there yesterday as well.
|
|
|
Post by suttonview on Nov 18, 2007 14:30:07 GMT
"- Dundas fought like a tiger and scored a terrific goal. " So that's another goalscorer you've poached then- not bad for a team who apparently has a smaller playing budget than us!? Just waiting for Taz to sober up and come on with some warm words, apropos of various posts on our boards last week Taz's words on here were, ahem, "Craig Dundas? Glad he turned us down, he's sh*t. Another Bobbins forward who never scores. " .
|
|
|
Post by The Editor on Nov 18, 2007 14:40:35 GMT
Agree with Miller - that's obstruction, not a penalty. It was in the area though.
|
|
taz
Top Performer
Posts: 3,760
|
Post by taz on Nov 18, 2007 15:37:31 GMT
Meh, I was wrong. Won't be the first time and certainly won't be the last! Great fightback from the lads though. Once we stopped farting about and went to 4-4-2, it just clicked. Haverson and Glover looked far happier playing as a centre pairing, the midfield was more solid and it gave the front two more chance to get hold of the ball and create chances. PS. Anyone else noticed that those tossers at SKY still haven't put our 6th point on the league table yet. Grrrr!
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,294
|
Post by markf on Nov 18, 2007 15:40:36 GMT
Most refs would have given a penalty for that. I thought he made some technical errors yesterday - if he's gonna pace out 10 yards, pace it in yards not half yards.
But to be fair, he did on the time that was due & we scored in the 6th minute of it.
|
|
Gareth
1st team Player
Goon
Posts: 1,646
|
Post by Gareth on Nov 18, 2007 16:08:05 GMT
Most refs would have given a penalty for that. For what? What offence was actually committed? If he's given a penalty for obstruction, then he's applying his own laws and he's not there to do that! As there is video evidence, then I would hope that the assessor is shown a copy of this and asks the ref to explain the decision
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,294
|
Post by markf on Nov 19, 2007 18:19:03 GMT
For making no attempt to play the ball & stopping the man illegally. These days obstruction is rarely given. You don't often see a ref raising his arm at a free-kick when a player has been prevented from progressing with the ball because an opponent has used his body rather than make a foul tackle.
I'm not saying it's right but that's how it is. A little like foul throws no longer being picked up on.
|
|
|
Post by os on Nov 19, 2007 18:41:13 GMT
TBH: I thought it was a clear penalty from where I was a daft and silly challenge taking the fwd out, very similar to the one we did not get last week when Mcbean was through!
|
|
bh
1st team Player
Come on you Us
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by bh on Nov 19, 2007 18:44:49 GMT
I was advised at the time that despite my protests from the far end of the ground that, if it was in the box, it was a penalty!
|
|
Gareth
1st team Player
Goon
Posts: 1,646
|
Post by Gareth on Nov 19, 2007 19:00:55 GMT
The Laws of the Game state that:
A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following six offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
trips or attempts to trip an opponent
jumps at an opponent
charges an opponent
strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
pushes an opponent A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following four offences:
tackles an opponent to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the opponent before touching the ball holds an opponent spits at an opponent handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area).
A direct free kick is taken from where the offence occurred.
A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play.
An indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper, inside his own penalty area, commits any of the following four offences: takes more than six seconds while controlling the ball with his hands before releasing it from his possession
touches the ball again with his hands after it has been released from his possession and has not touched any other player
touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate
touches the ball with his hands after he has received it directly from a throw-in taken by a team-mate.
An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player, in the opinion of the referee:
plays in a dangerous manner impedes the progress of an opponent prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands;
commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which play is stopped to caution or dismiss a player.
The indirect free kick is taken from where the offence occurred
I'm not disputing the fact that it was a foul. The offence though was "impeding the progress of an opponent, which is an indirect free kick.
|
|
|
Post by os on Nov 19, 2007 20:02:02 GMT
Well watched it again and I still say Penalty, old fashion sandwich aimed at the player not between ball and player therefore direct kick Mind you his progress was certainly impeded laying there on the ground!
|
|
|
Post by joemonx on Nov 19, 2007 20:40:10 GMT
well done on the second half performance! i was at the match as a neutral and at half time we were thinking how bad you were playing but once you went to 4 - 4 -2 and hayes started to lay off you it was great to see you do well. The equalizer in the last minute was well deserved. Only negative is that Ozu Opara was abismal you'd be much better without him! joe (bath city fan)
|
|