VulcanRam

7 hours ago, YorkshireRam said:

Why are people preferring Ward over Wilson at RB? Neither are defensively amazing but Wilson has looked more solid there to my eyes (and gives away less penalties).

Playing Wilson at fullback gives him the space to use his greatest strength- progressive dribbling, whilst Ward as a winger would still be able to utilise his crossing. Given that Wilson sometimes lacks end product, this way round seems more sensible to me?

If it’s a choice between Ward or Wilson at RB, I choose Smith.

Football is a fickle game. Made a mistake and will pay for it with a ban. But he still has value to us.

When he comes on as sub against Carlisle to nod in the winner that sends us up, everyone will be singing his name. 

16 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

Sorry, perhaps I didn’t explain my interpretation of the law very well. I think your second paragraph is the key one. If the ball brushes past the arm of a player on its way into the goal, with the slightest of touches, is it deemed that that player “scored” the goal? I would say not but what do I know. If it had happened in our goal mouth, and the goal ruled out, I would have thought it harsh on Bolton but relieved that we had been saved by a technicality.

As you say, the important thing is it doesn’t matter as the goal was given. I feel comfortable that it was the right decision but if it wasn’t, it kind of makes up for some of the wrong decisions that have gone against us including the two big ones at Bolton.

Ah I totally see where you're coming from - the answer to your question is this: if it brushes the arm of a player on its way into goal, then Waghorn will be ruled the scorer as it touched him last, same as if it brushed off his head or foot. I guess "brush" is subjective as it depends on the deviation of the ball, but that's another point!

In that situation it will be deemed handball if the referee sees it (or particularly VAR picks it up) and deems it to have been contact, under Law 12 of it being an offence to score directly from a hand or arm.

I think the grey area sits that technically the ball might brush the arm but its so slight that the on field officials miss it (my first reaction to my lad was that Waggy did well to get out of the way of it). I think it's one of those that the on field gives but when VAR looks at the stills they might rule out, similar to lots of VAR decisions we've seen.

Hope that helps mate, tbh we've spent far too much time thinking about it but as a ref I love the intricacies of the laws. 

2 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

The rule doesn't say it's immaterial but it does say the player needs to have scored in the opponents goal either directly or immediately after the ball hit is arm/hand. So, IMO, it's not that straightforward. Maybe, just maybe, it could be concluded that Waggy didn't "score" the goal. Personally, I wonder if this element of the rule is to differentiate between incidents where the ball wouldn't have gone in if it hadn't hit the players arm (or maybe it might have been saved if I hadn't been sufficiently deflected) versus incidents when it would have gone in anyway. 🤷‍♂️

Thanks TR, I'm really not sure what you're getting at? If the ball hits a players arm/hand and goes in, it's handball and no goal. If it hits a players arm/hand and he goes on to score immediately, it's no goal. It's got nothing to do with anything else that might or might not have been happening or where the ball might or might not have been travelling. What's not straightforward about that? 

The rule has actually been changed in recent years (again) - it used to be if the ball hit a players hand/arm (deliberately or not) and a goal was scored directly after by anyone, it was ruled out. It was changed to only being disallowed if it was the players whose arm it hit who scores. 

Anyway, the goal was given to Wilson which means the officials obviously thought Waghorn hadn't touched it at all. If they thought it had his his hip then he gets the goal. If they thought it had hit his arm they would have to rule it out. 

24 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I don’t think that is strictly true. Law 12 says it is an offence if the player:

* Touches the ball deliberately with their hand or arm

* Touches the ball with their hand or arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger

or

* Scores in the opponents goal directly from their arm/hand, even if was accidental, or scores immediately after it touches his am/hand even if it was accidental.

Clearly this incident would fail the first two tests. The third test is a little less cut and dry but I think it’s conceivable that it might have been concluded that Waggy didn’t “score” (despite his claims) as the ball was heading into an open net before it is alleged to have made contact with his arm and the flight of the ball was only marginally changed (if at all).

It's immaterial where the ball may or may not be heading or whether the flight of the ball was marginally changed. The law is very clear on this point. Had the officials deemed it had hit Waggy's arm (deliberate or not) and gone directly into the goal or it touches his arm and then another part of his body (ie he shoots or heads in) before entering the goal, it's no goal. It's one of the few straigthtforward parts of the handball law that isn't open to interpretation.

The only conclusion is they must have presumed he didn't touch it. 

7 minutes ago, ram59 said:

I think that we need to face facts that there is at least one person on here, whose sole purpose is to wind everybody up. By replying to their posts, you are only encouraging them further.

A collective placing that person on ignore will starve them of their 'enjoyment' of ruining everybody else's.

Indeed, the more people bite at their nonsense, the more they will get a kick out of winding people up. Just ignore it and they'll go away.

1Wildsmith 9 save of the season first half, and another great save second half, kicking was a bit off

35Nelson 9 Outstanding performance 

3Forsyth 9 Great to have him back, rock solid and good on the ball

6Cashin 9 Head, head, slide tackle, head

23Ward 6.5 Was having a decent game but obviously had a knock

2Wilson 8 run - head - goal

32Adams 9 If we'd had him from day 1 we'd be winning this league, has filled a big gap in team capabilities

4Hourihane 5 doesn't have the legs for games like this

16Thompson 7.5 his bundles of energy are well known, but he's got great feet too

17Sibley 6.5 played well I thought, surprised to see him hooked

20Elder 7 Great corner for the goal, looked to get forward more than previously

7Barkhuizen 6 as a 10 he was ok, looked lost as a 9 and a natural sacrifice after Gayle's injury

10Waghorn 6 led the line well enough

25Gayle 6 so sorry to see him injured

12Smith 8 again, came on and made a big difference with his passing ability

11Méndez-Laing 8 consistently a threat, good defensive work

On 12/03/2024 at 22:27, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

What's the reasoning, any idea? 

The upper west stand corner is reserved for staff across the club and community trust, who get 2 x free STs. Previously they'd be left empty if not used, but now staff have to apply for their tickets (they're still free) and after a certain date those not applied for get released for sale. 

10 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I understand why you both might think it's hypocritical that a tiny minority our fans should chant that after what we went through but, as the extract from the match preview below taken from one of their fans forums shows, they aren't exactly contrite about how they behaved towards us in those dark days despite the knowledge that their own club was "cheating" every bit as much. 

Yeah I get all that, but can't we be a bit better? Maybe I'm being a snowflake!!

4 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I remember when Martin was sent off at Burnley and some fans were saying that he was stupid to go down because he wasn't touched. Then a close-up replay showed that the Burnley defender had caught the back of Martin's boot on his standing leg and it was red faces all round.

That's why I don't think it's worth trying to work out whether the decisions were correct or not when the available replays aren't conclusive and the officials didn't have a clear view of the incident anyway.

Earlier in the season, we had Rebecca Welch giving a late penalty award against us v Wycombe when replays showed she couldn't possibly have had a clear view of any contact and neither could the lino, but they gave the award anyway probably because "it looked LIKELY that Ward had clipped the attacker sufficiently firmly to bring him down". Yesterday's key decisions were, for me, of a similar nature. The ref believed he'd seen contact on Hourihane, and probably couldn't see any contact between Gayle's hand and the ball. 

IMO Yiadom paid the price for his own behaviour throughout the game and it was a fitting punishment who got away with some dreadful tackles and acts far darker than anything DCFC players got away with, and the Reading keeper got what his rash behaviour deserved, much like Wildsmith at Oxford.

Great points. There is no way the referee could see whether Gayle handled it because Gayle had his back to him. The assistant was on the other side so couldn't have seen it. They both saw Gayle get to the ball first and be taken down, so it was the sensible decision.

I loved the comedy VAR call and subsequent hands on head meltdown by their keeper.

Perhaps rather than moan at the officials, he shouldn't be rushing out of his goal and giving the referee a decision to make?

6 minutes ago, Srg said:

The club sold the match going fans a bit of a kipper with this. There was nothing to state what was happening, so when we’d already had a time out shortly before for the old keeper injury shtick, fans understandably got annoyed and booed. Could’ve been avoided with some communication anywhere. Dont think any would have had an issue if we knew why!

Not just that, I'd like to think any player playing at this elite level while observing Ramadan fasting deserves huge credit and support. Had the club communicated it I'd think Adams and any of the other players on the pitch would have received an excellent reception on resumption on the game.  

Instead, everyone around me at first thought the keeper was playing up again or something. Didn't take long for the penny to drop, but could have been far better managed by the club. 

4 minutes ago, abertawe_ram said:

Haven't read through the thread to see if this was mentioned anywhere, apologies if it's been raised here or elsewhere.

Was anyone else really disappointed with our fans singing the "we're all having a party" chant. Hoped we might be more sympathetic given recent history. Back when blackpool had issues with their owners I remember us showing some solidarity with their fans, yet last night our loud minority seemed to want to act like d********. During our rough period, there was a lot of posts by fans slating the likes of birmingham, cardiff and other fans who chanted about our club dying. Yet last night the exact same shitty song was used by our fans against another team. 

Maybe its because I have some family in reading a close friend who supports them but it all left a bad taste for me. I was a bit embarrassed by those chants...

Totally agree. Embarrassing and unnecessary. Makes us every bit as classless and stupid as Birmingham, which I hoped I'd never have to say. Thankfully not many joined in, it was just the usual meatheads who can't wait to have a go at our own fans if the atmosphere dips.

1Wildsmith 6 nowt to do 

35Nelson 7 nice and solid

5Bradley 6 good game, nearly gifted PV a goal at the end

6Cashin 7 good game though not really tested 

23Ward 7.5 much more like it 

8Bird 6 didn’t really drive the team forward against poor opposition 

32Adams 6 not as involved as in recent games 

4Hourihane 6

17Sibley 7.5 two good goals and attacked well, second half particularly 

11Méndez-Laing 5 seems out of form atm

27Blackett-Taylor 6

25Gayle 7 good movement, good goal, if we got him proper service he could be the difference

10Waghorn 6

7Barkhuizen 6 influential in the build up to both goals, but otherwise largely anonymous. Not sure what his role was.

12Smith 6

13 hours ago, Jram said:

I’m not suggesting anyone is right or wrong but I do question what is driving peoples point of view and I think sometimes it would be valuable to genuinely question whether you’re angry with Warne or whether you’re just generally angry that Derby lost. 
 

Im always irrationally angry when Derby lose. I hate everyone- the opposition players, the opposition manager, derbys players and manager etc

After a bit of reflection, I often realise that none of those people are to blame. Or, if they are to blame like obviously Wildsmith was, there’s no value in demonising them. Wildsmith is a good keeper who happens to have made two high profile mistakes in recent games. He’s still good. He’s going to make more mistakes in his career. 

Same with Warne. Would the grass be any greener with any other manager? I tend to doubt it 

Which is fine, yet plenty think it would be. I'm one of them, but I'm not going to slaughter Warne as it's not really in my nature plus there are parts of it all which are ok. There's plenty he's done right this season.

Tbh, when we've lost, even by the time I've made a 10 minute walk back to the car I'm over it. It doesn't bother me that much, and neither do I get over excited when we win (though obviously that's my preference), which is probably why I place more importance of enjoying the game I'm watching as I've given up most of my day to go.

40 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Nothing wrong with being positive at all.

Here's your chance.

Could you list the positives under the current manager? A genuine question. I'll start, he signed a good lad in Nelson and I rate him.

He's genuinely a nice guy who cares passionately about what his is doing and trying to achieve. He's very popular around the club with the staff. He's a good ambassador for the club and supports the work of the Community Trust. I like that about him regardless of my opinion of him as a football manager. 

2 hours ago, Jram said:

It’s difficult because it’s tempting to lump all the people commenting negatively about Warne into one group which is perhaps unfair.

However, in general it strikes me that everyone comes out so angry and negative when we lose and/or play badly and the amount cognitive bias is insane. We haven’t played that badly in that many games and we have won a number of games quite convincingly this season. 
 

However, it is League 1. The pitches are bad, the players are quite bad (even the better players) and the tactics of a lot of teams are frequently to try and destroy football rather than create nice football. 
 

We have been unable to recruit a replacement for Collins (Gayle hasn’t really had a go yet though) so inevitably that will have an impact. Personally I think we’ve got away with not signing another centre back as well. 
 

From where im standing it seems that, if people took a minute to be remotely rational, they’d realise Warne is doing quite a good job. Not just in terms of league position but even in some performances and the recruitment has been pretty good given the constant contraints. 
 

Of course I have criticisms. The main one is the lack of academy minutes but I’ll give him the benefit this season as the current generation was gutted during admin so that may change in coming years. 

I think it depends on what your starting point is. If you're starting point is "I want to be entertained" then that will drive your view of our football and your opinions of how the team is managed and plays, as will "I'm not bothered about the football, I just want to win" - same team and manager but a different starting perspective so a different view.

If your starting point is "I think this group of players is ok, and so second is ok" then you'll probably be perfectly happy, if you think "This is a very good group of players and they are under performing", then that will drive your viewpoint. 

Equally, maybe Warne "doing quite a good job" isn't enough for some. Maybe they think at a club our size, with this fan base and a good budget, he should be doing a "good job", or even a "great job". Why should we settle for "quite a good job", which sounds a bit mediocre, they might say?

All of these views are valid, and I don't think it's fair to suggest that people being "remotely rational" will only lead to one conclusion.

1Wildsmith 5 kicking was urgh 

35Nelson 7 solid, great headband 

5Bradley 7 continued his good form, good goal

6Cashin 6 lost his man for the second goal

2Wilson 5 for the million time, not a wing back. When pushed forward he was more effective, though slow getting the ball in

4Hourihane 5 for the millionth time, with Adams in the team he is not really required

7Barkhuizen 6 added a bit of zip to the attack but without much meaning

32Adams 6 Not his usual influence, did a great job getting out of the way of Bradley's header

12Smith 6.5 Came on to pass the ball better, and passed the ball better, more effective in there than Hourihane.

20Elder 6 for the millionth time, not a wing back. But he is a good defender. 

24Nyambe 6.5 Big and strong. And big. Could have done with him from the start tbh.

8Bird 🐦 5 Not really in the game

17Sibley 6.5 Added bite and fire to the midfield first half, but also had to play as an attacker, which didn't really work

25Gayle 6 Did he score? Did he not? I still don't know. Flag was up anyway.

11Méndez-Laing 6 for the half millionth time, he's only good when out wide. Please. 

15 hours ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

I've been to every home league game this season and I've not seen any crowd less than circa 24k but mostly it's at least 26 to 27k.

I think your figures are incorrect for the reasons stated by others.

And you are free to think what you like, but unless you counted every person in the crowd I’ll go by what club execs told me, and which formed the basis for discussion in a work environment, I imagine they have a far better idea than you. Why would they lie?

2 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

But the football is appalling isn't it? People are fed up with Warneball aren't they? Season ticket sales will drop if we carry on like this won't they? 😀

Sometimes, sometimes, no 🙂 

7 minutes ago, Foreveram said:

That’s what you get when the season starts at the beginning of August during the School holidays.

For sure. Plus we're right in the mix of late so people are making more of an effort to go.

On 18/02/2024 at 23:09, oodledoodle said:

Yesterday gets a pass from me, as far as the football goes. Finding some kind of shape without a number 9 was always going to be really hard. It's not an easy position to play. Us being disjointed and not even taking a shot in the first half wasn't a surprise. I don't think there was much the coaching staff could have done to change that. Credit to the players and staff for keeping going and finding a way to score.

I don't think there's much more the management could have done, there was some the players could. It wasn't a dreadful performance as some might have you believe, but we gave the ball away a lot, passes going into touch unnecessarily, kicking from Wildsmith was very off, failing to find players with relatively simple balls.

We made life hard for ourselves sometimes when we didn't have to, which only encouraged Barnsley on. I didn't think there was much between the teams, but neither can I argue with the result. 

On 18/02/2024 at 22:55, oodledoodle said:

Glad you enjoyed this week's subs, but Nyambe was injured last week. That's why he came off. Nothing tactical about it. So blaming Warne for it is a tad unfair.

Editing to add he didn't take Collins off last match when he got his knock, despite us being ahead. Now we've lost Collins for a while.

So you win some and you lose some. But we all have the benefit of hindsight whereas Warne doesn't when we're making those subs. Everyone's an expert in hindsight.

And there's me thinking you were an expert all the time.

8 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

A third didn't attend though? I know it was a Tuesday night but that sounds like a staggeringly high number and is almost too insane to believe. 

Which I guess is why it was the focus of discussion. I know the club was concerned early season, particularly around hospitality. I can't really say much more other than the numbers have been really good the last couple of months. 

3 minutes ago, Foreveram said:

24,719 attendance with 1,339 away fans.

Are you suggesting 9,380 didn’t turn up 🤷🏻‍♂️

Yes, because that's what I was told as per other posts. No reason for the club exec to not tell the truth, and it was quite a long discussion about a related issue. Not just ST, but staff, comps, hospitality as well. Even some who had bought tickets for on the day. I was as surrprised as anyone. 

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

Assuming there were a couple of thousand from Northampton, are you saying the actual crowd was only c16k + freebies? Seriously? I find that very hard to believe unless they give away something like 5000 tickets which sounds like a very high number. Stunning if true. I also thought that it had been determined that the club now only counts actual attendees.

To add, if we have sold 20,000 season tickets, are you suggesting more than 6,000 of them didn't attend the Northampton game?

 

They're the figures that were provided by someone at the club during a discussion, so yes. Lots of talk at the club earlier in the season about ST holders not attending. Not really a problem now.