Match Thread: vs Bolton (A)

[Elwood P Dowd]

32 minutes ago, Rambalin said:

 

Thats exactly where Wildsmith pointed that the ball had hit him, to the ref.  

[Ian Buxton's Bat]

14 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

Thats exactly where Wildsmith pointed that the ball had hit him, to the ref.  

That is outstanding keeping.

Appeal......and lino in NPL for a few weeks.

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

The only camera angle for the sending off is inconclusive but I’d be surprised if it didn’t hit his arm given the direction of the ball afterwards and we would have been screaming blue murder if we hadn’t been given the penalty that Bolton were awarded. I haven’t found any replays of our penalty appeals and, although at the time I didn’t think any of them strong shouts, you may well be right.

The most ridiculous thing the ref did was to award our penalty rather than allow the original goal to stand. He got away with one then given we scored the penalty anyway but, a big error in my opinion. Personally, I think he should be taken to task for that as a future learning for him. If he does it again it could have much more severe consequences. Why did he allow play to continue after the Wildsmith hand ball but not the foul on Washington?
 

As you say though, essentially we lost the game because we were by far the poorer team and we were reduced to 10 men meaning Bolton could just be patient and dominate even more.

Whilst it would have been a travesty, on another day they wouldn’t have scored their deflected goal or we might have been awarded a second half penalty and we might have held on for a point. But, that’s not how it works of course and the game might have panned out completely differently if either of those things had happened.

I think most of us would have taken three points from the last two away games it’s just disappointing how comprehensively outplayed we were (for large parts of the game) yesterday.

Just watched the X clip of the Wildsmith incident and it doesn’t look like handball. Unfortunate but it’s easy to see why the officials thought it was.

[gfs1ram]

Just now, Tamworthram said:

Just watched the X clip of the Wildsmith incident and it doesn’t look like handball. Unfortunate but it’s easy to see why the officials thought it was.

Yes by guessing !!

[Tamworthram]

8 minutes ago, Ian Buxton's Bat said:

That is outstanding keeping.

Appeal......and lino in NPL for a few weeks.

Should definitely appeal. Whilst the ref certainly got things wrong, this was a tough one. For me, whilst it didn’t actually impact the result, awarding a penalty instead of allowing our goal to stand was a clear and obvious error.

[Tamworthram]

6 minutes ago, gfs1ram said:

Yes by guessing !!

I’m not sure he was guessing. From his view, and in real time, it probably did look like handball. He had to make a call, handball or not. If he’d not given hand ball would you have said he was guessing then?

[VulcanRam]

Well I enjoyed the day out at Bolton (well, a few miles away from Bolton), my first visit to that stadium. Good stadium, setup, home fans were very vocal. Seemed quiet in the away end. Lots of bars and restaurants in the area.

Positives from the game were that I thought we defended really well when under the cosh for long periods, and it took a fluke goal to beat us. Defenders were solid and Vickers made what looked like from the other end a couple of very good saves. I heard some criticism on the radio about players not putting a shift in - from my angle they all gave it 100%. Forsyth and Nelson had good games. Bradley did well other than his ricket. Thought Hourihane had a decent enough game. Fornah looked terrible first half out of position but much better when he was moved back. This is, of course, all in the context of the match and how were set up, if indeed we were set up in any particular way.

I was impressed with how Evatt set Bolton up, they played good football. They lacked a killer edge and looked a little ropey at the back on the odd occasion we tested them, which doesn't quite put them in the Plymouth/Ipswich bracket from last season, but they're a good side who will be up there. 

Referee: As some of you know I ref at county league level so may (or may not) be able to offer some insight. He's got the first big decision of the game wrong - he's decided Elder is fouled but given where Derby are should have waited a couple of seconds and given the goal. He's blown far too early and luckily we scored the penalty.

I think that has clearly influenced the way he managed the Wildsmith incident as this time instead of blowing up as soon as he saw the handball he has  waited to see if the Bolton players scores into an empty net. As soon as he doesn't, he blows for the foul. Having indicated a foul, he has made up his mind and the red can come out there as it's deliberate handball stopping an obvious goalscoring opportunity (DOGSO). Given that it's such a big decision, he has a word with his assistant, and he'll be asking him whether he saw anything that would change his mind. If, as it turned out, the assistant couldn't say one way or the other, the ref sticks with his decision. It was actually good refereeing.

Their penalty. Only VAR could say whether it was in or out of the box. We don't have VAR and it looked to me and everyone around me that it was a penalty, so it's hard to criticise too much. 

Derby penalty appeals in the second half: The "handball" when the player is falling over and the ball hits his hand is not handball. The rules clearly state that if a player is putting an arm out to stabilise himself and its not deliberate, then it's not handball. The potential penalty when NML tangles with their number 5 was 50/50 - it was both players fighting for the ball but the defender did have his arm at neck height on NML so maybe. But I felt the one on Bradley was an absolute stonewall. Defender not looking at the ball as it comes across and just hauls him to the ground. It was a far more blatant foul than the one we got the peno for. So poor refereeing. 

Derby - tactically shambolic. No notable shape or patters of play. Players looked like they weren't sure who was meant to be where. I get why Warne put Bradley on ahead of Cash. I was frustrated second half as we were on the ropes and both Warne and Barker were sitting down and we had no-one standing and organising/encouraging etc. Putting JJ on at the end and not putting him through the middle up against their lumbering number 5, who was always the last man in a 3 and had already been booked, was criminal.

There is a clear pattern emerging this season against teams that play football and I'm afraid there was nothing in that game, against one of the promotion front runners, that convinced me Warne is up to the task. Equally, he is being hamstrung by injuries and yesterday we didn't get the rub of the green, although we certainly could have helped ourselves with some organisation, composure and some time spent in possession of the football. Warne isn't going to suddenly change his mantra, we can only hope though it is more effective when we have a fully fit squad, if that ever happens.   

Sorry, that was a much longer post that I'd anticipated!

[angieram]

1 minute ago, Tamworthram said:

I’m not sure he was guessing. From his view, and in real time, it probably did look like handball. He had to make a call, handball or not. If he’d not given hand ball would you have said he was guessing then?

It doesn't work like that. You can't give what you didn't see. If he didn't see it, he shouldn't have given it. 

 

[VulcanRam]

5 minutes ago, angieram said:

It doesn't work like that. You can't give what you didn't see. If he didn't see it, he shouldn't have given it. 

 

You're right, so presumably he did see it. You could easily argue from the video above that it's hit his thumb. Wildsmith was pointing to his chest and it doesn't appear to go anywhere near his chest. I have no idea, you just have to trust the officials make an honest decision. Much like players and managers, sometimes those decisions, with the speed of the game and in that exact moment, are wrong. We can all benefit from hindsight and video. 

[VulcanRam]

Interestingly though, looking at the highlights, you'd expect all the Bolton players to go up when it his Wildsmith's hand, but there was no appeal at all from the players. Maybe in the moment they were concentrating on scoring, but normally you'd get an appeal.

[angieram]

11 minutes ago, VulcanRam said:

Well I enjoyed the day out at Bolton (well, a few miles away from Bolton), my first visit to that stadium. Good stadium, setup, home fans were very vocal. Seemed quiet in the away end. Lots of bars and restaurants in the area.

Positives from the game were that I thought we defended really well when under the cosh for long periods, and it took a fluke goal to beat us. Defenders were solid and Vickers made what looked like from the other end a couple of very good saves. I heard some criticism on the radio about players not putting a shift in - from my angle they all gave it 100%. Forsyth and Nelson had good games. Bradley did well other than his ricket. Thought Hourihane had a decent enough game. Fornah looked terrible first half out of position but much better when he was moved back. This is, of course, all in the context of the match and how were set up, if indeed we were set up in any particular way.

I was impressed with how Evatt set Bolton up, they played good football. They lacked a killer edge and looked a little ropey at the back on the odd occasion we tested them, which doesn't quite put them in the Plymouth/Ipswich bracket from last season, but they're a good side who will be up there. 

Referee: As some of you know I ref at county league level so may (or may not) be able to offer some insight. He's got the first big decision of the game wrong - he's decided Elder is fouled but given where Derby are should have waited a couple of seconds and given the goal. He's blown far too early and luckily we scored the penalty.

I think that has clearly influenced the way he managed the Wildsmith incident as this time instead of blowing up as soon as he saw the handball he has  waited to see if the Bolton players scores into an empty net. As soon as he doesn't, he blows for the foul. Having indicated a foul, he has made up his mind and the red can come out there as it's deliberate handball stopping an obvious goalscoring opportunity (DOGSO). Given that it's such a big decision, he has a word with his assistant, and he'll be asking him whether he saw anything that would change his mind. If, as it turned out, the assistant couldn't say one way or the other, the ref sticks with his decision. It was actually good refereeing.

Their penalty. Only VAR could say whether it was in or out of the box. We don't have VAR and it looked to me and everyone around me that it was a penalty, so it's hard to criticise too much. 

Derby penalty appeals in the second half: The "handball" when the player is falling over and the ball hits his hand is not handball. The rules clearly state that if a player is putting an arm out to stabilise himself and its not deliberate, then it's not handball. The potential penalty when NML tangles with their number 5 was 50/50 - it was both players fighting for the ball but the defender did have his arm at neck height on NML so maybe. But I felt the one on Bradley was an absolute stonewall. Defender not looking at the ball as it comes across and just hauls him to the ground. It was a far more blatant foul than the one we got the peno for. So poor refereeing. 

Derby - tactically shambolic. No notable shape or patters of play. Players looked like they weren't sure who was meant to be where. I get why Warne put Bradley on ahead of Cash. I was frustrated second half as we were on the ropes and both Warne and Barker were sitting down and we had no-one standing and organising/encouraging etc. Putting JJ on at the end and not putting him through the middle up against their lumbering number 5, who was always the last man in a 3 and had already been booked, was criminal.

There is a clear pattern emerging this season against teams that play football and I'm afraid there was nothing in that game, against one of the promotion front runners, that convinced me Warne is up to the task. Equally, he is being hamstrung by injuries and yesterday we didn't get the rub of the green, although we certainly could have helped ourselves with some organisation, composure and some time spent in possession of the football. Warne isn't going to suddenly change his mantra, we can only hope though it is more effective when we have a fully fit squad, if that ever happens.   

Sorry, that was a much longer post that I'd anticipated!

Interesting post regarding the sending off. Can I ask, as there were three defenders behind Wildsmith at that point, how is it an empty net? Wildsmith wasn't last man, so is there a different rule for goalkeepers? Because if that had been an outfield player, he wasn't last man and wouldn't have been sent off. It would have been a yellow. My husband thinks it may be a different rule for goalkeepers, could you clarify? 

And on  waiting to see if the player had scored first before awarding the free kick - 

1. He didn't do that for our first goal, even though there was a much shorter time distance, he gave the penalty immediately. 

2. If a referee allows the advantage and it doesn’t work, is it then okay to give a second opportunity to score through the free kick? Isn't that unfair? 

[angieram]

9 minutes ago, VulcanRam said:

You're right, so presumably he did see it. You could easily argue from the video above that it's hit his thumb. Wildsmith was pointing to his chest and it doesn't appear to go anywhere near his chest. I have no idea, you just have to trust the officials make an honest decision. Much like players and managers, sometimes those decisions, with the speed of the game and in that exact moment, are wrong. We can all benefit from hindsight and video. 

It looks like it bounced off his chest to me. You can see his shirt move! 

[Tamworthram]

16 minutes ago, angieram said:

It doesn't work like that. You can't give what you didn't see. If he didn't see it, he shouldn't have given it. 

 

It does work like that. He probably thought (I assume) he saw it hit Wildsmith’s arm. We’ll never know but I reckon if we could hear the conversation he had with his assistant it would go something like “I think/believe I saw it hit his arm. Do you agree?”. Not “I didn’t see if it hit his arm or his chest. I’m going to go for arm. What do you think?”

[brady1993]

6 minutes ago, VulcanRam said:

Well I enjoyed the day out at Bolton (well, a few miles away from Bolton), my first visit to that stadium. Good stadium, setup, home fans were very vocal. Seemed quiet in the away end. Lots of bars and restaurants in the area.

Positives from the game were that I thought we defended really well when under the cosh for long periods, and it took a fluke goal to beat us. Defenders were solid and Vickers made what looked like from the other end a couple of very good saves. I heard some criticism on the radio about players not putting a shift in - from my angle they all gave it 100%. Forsyth and Nelson had good games. Bradley did well other than his ricket. Thought Hourihane had a decent enough game. Fornah looked terrible first half out of position but much better when he was moved back. This is, of course, all in the context of the match and how were set up, if indeed we were set up in any particular way.

I was impressed with how Evatt set Bolton up, they played good football. They lacked a killer edge and looked a little ropey at the back on the odd occasion we tested them, which doesn't quite put them in the Plymouth/Ipswich bracket from last season, but they're a good side who will be up there. 

Referee: As some of you know I ref at county league level so may (or may not) be able to offer some insight. He's got the first big decision of the game wrong - he's decided Elder is fouled but given where Derby are should have waited a couple of seconds and given the goal. He's blown far too early and luckily we scored the penalty.

I think that has clearly influenced the way he managed the Wildsmith incident as this time instead of blowing up as soon as he saw the handball he has  waited to see if the Bolton players scores into an empty net. As soon as he doesn't, he blows for the foul. Having indicated a foul, he has made up his mind and the red can come out there as it's deliberate handball stopping an obvious goalscoring opportunity (DOGSO). Given that it's such a big decision, he has a word with his assistant, and he'll be asking him whether he saw anything that would change his mind. If, as it turned out, the assistant couldn't say one way or the other, the ref sticks with his decision. It was actually good refereeing.

Their penalty. Only VAR could say whether it was in or out of the box. We don't have VAR and it looked to me and everyone around me that it was a penalty, so it's hard to criticise too much. 

Derby penalty appeals in the second half: The "handball" when the player is falling over and the ball hits his hand is not handball. The rules clearly state that if a player is putting an arm out to stabilise himself and its not deliberate, then it's not handball. The potential penalty when NML tangles with their number 5 was 50/50 - it was both players fighting for the ball but the defender did have his arm at neck height on NML so maybe. But I felt the one on Bradley was an absolute stonewall. Defender not looking at the ball as it comes across and just hauls him to the ground. It was a far more blatant foul than the one we got the peno for. So poor refereeing. 

Derby - tactically shambolic. No notable shape or patters of play. Players looked like they weren't sure who was meant to be where. I get why Warne put Bradley on ahead of Cash. I was frustrated second half as we were on the ropes and both Warne and Barker were sitting down and we had no-one standing and organising/encouraging etc. Putting JJ on at the end and not putting him through the middle up against their lumbering number 5, who was always the last man in a 3 and had already been booked, was criminal.

There is a clear pattern emerging this season against teams that play football and I'm afraid there was nothing in that game, against one of the promotion front runners, that convinced me Warne is up to the task. Equally, he is being hamstrung by injuries and yesterday we didn't get the rub of the green, although we certainly could have helped ourselves with some organisation, composure and some time spent in possession of the football. Warne isn't going to suddenly change his mantra, we can only hope though it is more effective when we have a fully fit squad, if that ever happens.   

Sorry, that was a much longer post that I'd anticipated!

Sorry for picking up on a very small point of your post but I've seen this sentiment floated in a bunch of places. 

At what point do we cast a critical eye at why we've consistently had a large injury list under Warne ? And especially concerning is the growing number of injuries amongst young players ? The thing is I can't say I'm entirely surprised.

The way we play is highly physically demanding, it's a lot of running for the sake and an almost complete lack of control at times. It can lead to high fatigue levels and therefore a higher chance of injury (there is a reason why distance metrics and minutes played are closely monitored by the fitness teams at high level clubs). This is compounded by that Warne's management of player fitness has been frankly poor; players often play beyond the point of being knackered and there is minimal rotation when options are available.

There is also a more tenuous potential contribution of why in particular we've being seeing injuries to younger players. Muscle takes time to build and provides a certain element of resilience to injury for example it's possible to have no acl but still play if the leg is strong enough. Also physical training does promote strengthening of ligaments and tendons but it takes a long time. Its possible that the younger players are being exposed to a level of consistent physical demand that put simply they aren't ready for.

 

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

22 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I’m not sure he was guessing. From his view, and in real time, it probably did look like handball. He had to make a call, handball or not. If he’d not given hand ball would you have said he was guessing then?

He was guessing. He let the play carry on until the play had broken down and then had to go over to the linesman who was also guessing. 
 

Absolutely no excuse. 

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

1 minute ago, Tamworthram said:

It does work like that. He probably thought (I assume) he saw it hit Wildsmith’s arm. We’ll never know but I reckon if we could hear the conversation he had with his assistant it would go something like “I think/believe I saw it hit his arm. Do you agree?”. Not “I didn’t see if it hit his arm or his chest. I’m going to go for arm. What do you think?”

If think or believe comes into it, it’s not a sending off. 
 

It HAS to be 100% confident and he wasn’t. 

[CBRammette]

6 minutes ago, angieram said:

It looks like it bounced off his chest to me. You can see his shirt move! 

Yes agree but did it then bounce off chest to arm? Would like to see from that angle at normal speed. Also could Wildsmith's previous "sporting" behaviour have influenced his thought process? 

[RoyMac5]

5 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

Sorry for picking up on a very small point of your post but I've seen this sentiment floated in a bunch of places. 

At what point do we cast a critical eye at why we've consistently had a large injury list under Warne ? And especially concerning is the growing number of injuries amongst young players ? The thing is I can't say I'm entirely surprised.

The way we play is highly physically demanding, it's a lot of running for the sake and an almost complete lack of control at times. It can lead to high fatigue levels and therefore a higher chance of injury (there is a reason why distance metrics and minutes played are closely monitored by the fitness teams at high level clubs). This is compounded by that Warne's management of player fitness has been frankly poor; players often play beyond the point of being knackered and there is minimal rotation when options are available.

There is also a more tenuous potential contribution of why in particular we've being seeing injuries to younger players. Muscle takes time to build and provides a certain element of resilience to injury for example it's possible to have no acl but still play if the leg is strong enough. Also physical training does promote strengthening of ligaments and tendons but it takes a long time. Its possible that the younger players are being exposed to a level of consistent physical demand that put simply they aren't ready for.

 

I did wonder about this, but thought some would see it as another stick I was trying to beat Warne with.

I think TJJ must be nervous about this possibility seeing as how he's already employed a fitness 'body coach' to deal with the fact he seems very injury-prone.

[VulcanRam]

1 minute ago, angieram said:

Interesting post regarding the sending off. Can I ask, as there were three defenders behind Wildsmith at that point, how is it an empty net? Wildsmith wasn't last man, so is there a different rule for goalkeepers? Because if that had been an outfield player, he wasn't last man and wouldn't have been sent off. It would have been a yellow. My husband thinks it may be a different rule for goalkeepers, could you clarify? 

And on  waiting to see if the player had scored first before awarding the free kick - 

1. He didn't do that for our first goal, even though there was a much shorter time distance, he gave the penalty immediately. 

2. If a referee allows the advantage and it doesn’t work, is it then okay to give a second opportunity to score through the free kick? Isn't that unfair? 

1) There isn't a separate rule for goalkeepers - deliberate handball for a DOGSO outside the area is a straight red whoever does it, same as a pull, foul tackle or other offence - but the "last man" thing is a misnomer. The last man might technically be standing 10 yards away with no chance of getting to the attacker. It's about whether at that exact moment there is an obvious goalscoring opportunity from the angle of the striker. Even if a defender is on the line it remains an obviously goalscoring opportunity, opportunity here being key.

Referees are told to take a snapshot of that exact moment which helps as normally half a second after the offence the picture has changed (defenders getting back etc). So at that exact moment he sees (rightly or wrongly) the ball hitting Wildsmith's hand he freeze frames in his own mind the picture. There may be defenders around but if they are not blocking the line of strike of the attacker at that moment then yes it is an obvious goalscoring opportunity. It's a judgement call and we can all have different judgements.

1) Indeed he didn't, and he should have. I think that's on his mind with the Wildsmith incident, hence he waits. If the Bolton striker scores on that follow up shot and he has already blown he's made a similar error to our penalty.

2) Referees are allowed a few seconds (there is no definitive timescale provided, might be one second, might be five) to see whether an advantage is actually an advantage. It's a good rule and actually - on the proviso that there was a handball from Wildsmith - the referee has in this instance done the right thing. He's blown for the foul as soon as the follow up shot hasn't gone in.  Take our penalty - say that he's seen the peno but it looks like we're going to score as we did, but in another scenario we somehow missed that chance - there is no advantage to us playing on so we should have the penalty. If he allows that to play out and NOT give the penalty we'd all be howling as to why not! If he blows straight away as he did and we score, we're all howling that he didn't let play unfold for a second! Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

 

 

[angieram]

1 minute ago, CBRammette said:

Yes agree but did it then bounce off chest to arm? Would like to see from that angle at normal speed. Also could Wildsmith's previous "sporting" behaviour have influenced his thought process? 

If it did that's NOT a handball, same as when it bounces up off a player's thigh onto the arm. 

I didn't see any unsporting behaviour from Joe in this game. Anything like that should be completely irrelevant anyway. 

Although this was the bloke who referreed us at Plymouth, so who knows what goes on in his mind?