99 90th+ minute goals

[MuespachRam]

3 hours ago, PistoldPete2 said:

I dont think Burnley are in the penalty area a lot more than us and I dont know how many penos theyve conceded, but I know they fouled a Derby player in the penalty box a couple of seasons ago so maybe they dont know how to tackle. No peno given. Do sheff Wed defenders know how to tackle? Or is that refs dont give penos when one of our players goes down? Especially if his name is Chris Martin? 

Are you still going on about a decision that happened "a couple of seasons ago"?? Move on, even B4 has almost got over that...we'll probably not actually  

Burnley are getting more penalties because they are causing more problems for the opposition in the box. They are conceding less penalties because the opposition are causing less problems for them in their box. This is obvious. In other words it is because they are better than us....not really that hard to work out  

 

 

[Bris Vegas]

6 hours ago, PistoldPete2 said:

Ok so the only penalty weve scored from all season was for a handball? Weve not benefited from any fouls being given in the box.  Even Bolton were given a penalty against us. Sure we got some penalties two years ago when we beat Blackpool 5-1 and Forest 5-0  and Brum 4-0. i dont know there was much luck involved in any of those results. 

 

I don't understand the point you're trying to make? Other than the Christie foul, where else should we have had a penalty? And which of the Burnley penalties shouldn't have been given?

It's not Burnley's fault that Shackell broke down and gifted them a penalty.

Bolton got a penalty because we fouled one of their players in the box. It was a correct decision.

As for two seasons ago. We were losing 0-1 before winning the penalty against Blackpool. Against Brum we drew 3-3. Against Huddersfield it was 1-1 when he got the penalty.

I don't really need to go any further. You're arguement of Derby being treated unfairly and the likes of Burnley being lucky is pretty baseless. 

[PistoldPete2]

4 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

I don't understand the point you're trying to make? Other than the Christie foul, where else should we have had a penalty? And which of the Burnley penalties shouldn't have been given?

It's not Burnley's fault that Shackell broke down and gifted them a penalty.

Bolton got a penalty because we fouled one of their players in the box. It was a correct decision.

As for two seasons ago. We were losing 0-1 before winning the penalty against Blackpool. Against Brum we drew 3-3. Against Huddersfield it was 1-1 when he got the penalty.

I don't really need to go any further. You're arguement of Derby being treated unfairly and the likes of Burnley being lucky is pretty baseless. 

The stats say everything ... 8 penos to Burnley and 2 for us in almost an entire season.
Only one foul tackle given to us in the entire season. Your argument is that this is because we dont  get in the box that much. Yet Bolton hardly had a kick in the game against us but got a peno.

Are you saying we should have had only one more foul given to us in the entire season ie the Christie tackle? I think you must be basing this on Sky coverage but theres been at least one more Sky match where they showed two penos should have been given to us in a single game (was it the Brum game I cant remember). 

But away from the scrutiny of the Sky cameras there's  plenty of times when there are fouls in the box which dont get punished.

As for the Burnley penos against us, my own personal view , admittedly a minority is that handball should almost never be given in the penalty area. Hardly ever does a player deliberately handle the ball deliberately. Shackells was hand to ball rather than ball to hand so usually that is given as a peno.

So is a foul in the penalty area but that wasnt given to us when we played Burnley before , nor was the goal , instead Martin was sent off for nothing.

[rynny]

5 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

I don't understand the point you're trying to make? Other than the Christie foul, where else should we have had a penalty? And which of the Burnley penalties shouldn't have been given?

It's not Burnley's fault that Shackell broke down and gifted them a penalty.

Bolton got a penalty because we fouled one of their players in the box. It was a correct decision.

As for two seasons ago. We were losing 0-1 before winning the penalty against Blackpool. Against Brum we drew 3-3. Against Huddersfield it was 1-1 when he got the penalty.

I don't really need to go any further. You're arguement of Derby being treated unfairly and the likes of Burnley being lucky is pretty baseless. 

One of Sheff wed centre backs (Loovens I think) had Ince in a choke hold as the ball was crossed in to him in the first half. I would say that should have been a penalty, heck it would have even been a foul and a card in rugby.

[PistoldPete2]

12 hours ago, MuespachRam said:

Are you still going on about a decision that happened "a couple of seasons ago"?? Move on, even B4 has almost got over that...we'll probably not actually  

Burnley are getting more penalties because they are causing more problems for the opposition in the box. They are conceding less penalties because the opposition are causing less problems for them in their box. This is obvious. In other words it is because they are better than us....not really that hard to work out  

 

 

Burnley were better than us two years ago and over the season so far they are better than us now. I am going on about the fact that we only have two penos all season and the refs are rubbish. Bris was saying we got lucky two years ago but obviously we werent against Burnley when it really mattered.  We certainly havent been lucky with the refs this season, but fine we are in the play offs which is where we deserve to be so move on as you say..

[TETRA]

On 25 April 2016 at 13:11, jagerbob said:

Off topic slightly, but still an interesting statistic to me which is going to be hard to find the answer for :

I'd love to know the stats on goals for and against from Set Pieces. It always seems to me that Burnley score a lot of goals from corners, and dont concede many this way, equally I bet Derby have conceded a few this way, and certainly many teams' best chances and near misses when they play us, come from free kicks and corners. Likewise in the goals scored and chances created category its quite rare Derby can score this way, and I dont even get excited when we get a corner.

I like some others on here went to the Derby Arsenal U21s at Ipro recently, and it was noticeable that a high percentage of derbys best scoring opportunites came from corners and we looked a real threat from then, the exact opposite is true of the first team.

Well Burnley conceded two goals from corners in consecutive games when they played Wolves & Brighton recently.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Not scientific at all but my gut feeling is that a lot of penalties are won by fast centre forwards getting to through balls just ahead of defenders. We don't have a fast centre forward and as such we have fewer potential penalty situations?

[Bris Vegas]

6 hours ago, PistoldPete2 said:

The stats say everything ... 8 penos to Burnley and 2 for us in almost an entire season.
Only one foul tackle given to us in the entire season. Your argument is that this is because we dont  get in the box that much. Yet Bolton hardly had a kick in the game against us but got a peno.

Are you saying we should have had only one more foul given to us in the entire season ie the Christie tackle? I think you must be basing this on Sky coverage but theres been at least one more Sky match where they showed two penos should have been given to us in a single game (was it the Brum game I cant remember). 

But away from the scrutiny of the Sky cameras there's  plenty of times when there are fouls in the box which dont get punished.

As for the Burnley penos against us, my own personal view , admittedly a minority is that handball should almost never be given in the penalty area. Hardly ever does a player deliberately handle the ball deliberately. Shackells was hand to ball rather than ball to hand so usually that is given as a peno.

So is a foul in the penalty area but that wasnt given to us when we played Burnley before , nor was the goal , instead Martin was sent off for nothing.

Your logic is flawed. Burnley's eight penalties to our two says that Burnely were fouled eight times in the area and us only twice. The fact you can't give any more examples of us being fouled in the area goes to show you're arguing a pointless case. Bolton got a penalty againt us because we fouled them in the box. We didn't get a penalty against Bolton because, despite us dominating the match, they didn't foul us in the box...

You can't just blurt out that we should get more penalties over a season when you can't even give any examples of us being fouled in the box. For the amount of shots we have, we should score more goals too. But if the opposition goalkeeper saves them, or we don't hit the target, well we simply don't score on those occasions.

You keep going back to that Burnley decision two years ago. It was an awful decision, and it went against us. We're not the only team to have awful decisions go against us.

 

[Srg]

1 minute ago, Bris Vegas said:

Your logic is flawed. Burnley's eight penalties to our two says that Burnely were fouled eight times in the area and us only twice. The fact you can't give any more examples of us being fouled in the area goes to show you're arguing a pointless case. Bolton got a penalty againt us because we fouled them in the box. We didn't get a penalty against Bolton because, despite us dominating the match, they didn't foul us in the box...

You can't just blurt out that we should get more penalties over a season when you can't even give any examples of us being fouled in the box. For the amount of shots we have, we should score more goals too. But if the opposition goalkeeper saves them, or we don't hit the target, well we simply don't score on those occasions.

You keep going back to that Burnley decision two years ago. It was an awful decision, and it went against us. We're not the only team to have awful decisions go against us.

 

Should have had a penalty Saturday...

[Gypsy Ram]

On 25/04/2016 at 13:20, admira said:

That's how many there have been in the Championship so far this season.

As I couldn't find a website that provided this information, this was a real labour of love that involved clicking on every result this season on the BBC site. 

 

 

I hope all that effort was worth the six likes! 

[PistoldPete2]

1 hour ago, Bris Vegas said:

Your logic is flawed. Burnley's eight penalties to our two says that Burnely were fouled eight times in the area and us only twice. The fact you can't give any more examples of us being fouled in the area goes to show you're arguing a pointless case. Bolton got a penalty againt us because we fouled them in the box. We didn't get a penalty against Bolton because, despite us dominating the match, they didn't foul us in the box...

You can't just blurt out that we should get more penalties over a season when you can't even give any examples of us being fouled in the box. For the amount of shots we have, we should score more goals too. But if the opposition goalkeeper saves them, or we don't hit the target, well we simply don't score on those occasions.

You keep going back to that Burnley decision two years ago. It was an awful decision, and it went against us. We're not the only team to have awful decisions go against us.

 

Should have had a penalty on Saturday if not two as someone else said, Ince went down as well as Christie.

Oh and look at this..

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/aug/21/birmingham-city-derby-county-championship-match-report

Same frigging ref again.

 

So one single ref alone has denied us three clear penos this season and booked Martin for diving. I think there was another good peno shout in the Brum game too. The burnley decision two years ago is one of the reasons we dont get penos, refs have given Martin the reputation that he has.

I cant give you every peno decision that goes against us cos theres so many

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bris Vegas]

17 minutes ago, PistoldPete2 said:

Should have had a penalty on Saturday if not two as someone else said, Ince went down as well as Christie.

Oh and look at this..

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/aug/21/birmingham-city-derby-county-championship-match-report

Same frigging ref again.

 

So one single ref alone has denied us three clear penos this season and booked Martin for diving. I think there was another good peno shout in the Brum game too. The burnley decision two years ago is one of the reasons we dont get penos, refs have given Martin the reputation that he has.

I cant give you every peno decision that goes against us cos theres so many

Martin got penalties against Blackpool, Cardiff and Norwich from memory last season. He does get penalties....

I know we should have had a penalty on Saturday. At the same time Bryson and Keogh could have easily been sent off too. It's swings and roundabouts, not a conspiracy against Derby.

 

[jagerbob]

having players who take on defenders in the box helps.

Our season where we had dawkins and ward paid to this.

Could say the same for Bournemouth last year and Palace int the premiership when they still had andy johnson.

[DCFCArmy]

On 25/04/2016 at 13:24, DCFCArmy said:

When its a corner I don't bother watching 

when the oppo gets one I look away and pray 

Yeap....