|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Nov 20, 2016 0:08:28 GMT
Having now seen it, I think the correct decision under the new rules was penalty and a yellow ( which would also have meant him missing next week's game having picked up 5 cards)
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 20, 2016 0:28:51 GMT
One small point - it is not certain that had the Shawcross penalty been given that he would have been sent off under the new DOGSO ( denial of goal scoring opportunity) rules. For such offences in the penalty area it is now not a red card if the referee deems that there was a possibilty of playing the ball and that the player was making a genuine attempt to do so. I haven't seen the replay so don't know if that was the case, but the rule change has been brought in to avoid triple punishment when a player is trying to play the ball. Last season if it was a DOGSO foul it was an automatic red, but no longer if the offence is in the area. It definitely wouldn't have been a red, it was a clear attempt to play the ball. In fact the reason the ref didn't give it is that he thought Ryan touched it. upps just saw your 2nd post above, quite right
|
|
|
Post by 11wilkosinateam on Nov 20, 2016 7:15:46 GMT
Am i the only one who felt we actually played quite well yesterday. First half they bossed through their pressing but
They had 2 main chances in the first half and put one away.
We had: -Shawcross header cleared off the line - Bony header well saved - Missed PK - Shaq missed a sitter - Arnie missed a decent effort from outside the box - Walters missed a very easy header late on
A different day and we easily could have had 3/4
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Nov 20, 2016 8:21:38 GMT
Am i the only one who felt we actually played quite well yesterday. First half they bossed through their pressing but They had 2 main chances in the first half and put one away. We had: -Shawcross header cleared off the line - Bony header well saved - Missed PK - Shaq missed a sitter - Arnie missed a decent effort from outside the box - Walters missed a very easy header late on A different day and we easily could have had 3/4 You are not the only one. I agree with you. We were very much 2nd best first half. We missed Whelan's defensive cover and didn't have Cameron to come in to cover that. But 2nd half we did everything but score. Unlike some on here, I thought the substitutions were the right ones, but perhaps a little late. He went for a more direct approach with two strikers. That was why we had Walters not Ramadan. He could of course have kept the same system and replaced Shaq with Ramadan, or Bojan and moved Shaq to the "No.10" role but I thought 2 strikers was worth trying. Had he not already used a sub for Bardsley I think it's very likely Ramadan would have come on for Shaq. But where I disagree with you is that I think it's very harsh to describe Walters header as very easy. He made good contact on a diagonal ball and got it on target, just needed to be a couple of feet further away from the keeper
|
|
|
Post by alster on Nov 20, 2016 14:01:26 GMT
Am i the only one who felt we actually played quite well yesterday. First half they bossed through their pressing but They had 2 main chances in the first half and put one away. We had: -Shawcross header cleared off the line - Bony header well saved - Missed PK - Shaq missed a sitter - Arnie missed a decent effort from outside the box - Walters missed a very easy header late on A different day and we easily could have had 3/4 You are not the only one. I agree with you. We were very much 2nd best first half. We missed Whelan's defensive cover and didn't have Cameron to come in to cover that. But 2nd half we did everything but score. Unlike some on here, I thought the substitutions were the right ones, but perhaps a little late. He went for a more direct approach with two strikers. That was why we had Walters not Ramadan. He could of course have kept the same system and replaced Shaq with Ramadan, or Bojan and moved Shaq to the "No.10" role but I thought 2 strikers was worth trying. Had he not already used a sub for Bardsley I think it's very likely Ramadan would have come on for Shaq. But where I disagree with you is that I think it's very harsh to describe Walters header as very easy. He made good contact on a diagonal ball and got it on target, just needed to be a couple of feet further away from the keeper I don't think we missed Whelan. What would he have done to change the course of that game. He would not have stopped the ref giving that very dubious free kick against Pieters, he would hopefully not have been meant to be defending the said free kick in the position from which we conceded ie aerial ball centre of the box. He doesn't add creativity so would not have made us more likely to score. Charlie Adam had a poor game but did not cost us a goal, uncharacteristically he was fairly useless with the ball. Bony's mobility is non existent highlighted by the fact that bringing on the never very mobile Crouch actually improved our mobility. It was a slightly disappointing performance but by no means a terrible one. I thought we deserved a draw to be honest but the squad is looking really short of pace and energy and seriously in need of freshening.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Nov 20, 2016 14:52:14 GMT
charlie adam was on 5 live earlier, he said the 2nd half display was better and we deserved to win 3 or 4 to 1
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 20, 2016 15:46:24 GMT
Am i the only one who felt we actually played quite well yesterday. First half they bossed through their pressing but They had 2 main chances in the first half and put one away. We had: -Shawcross header cleared off the line - Bony header well saved - Missed PK - Shaq missed a sitter - Arnie missed a decent effort from outside the box - Walters missed a very easy header late on A different day and we easily could have had 3/4 No, you've missed my other posts, for one of which I was criticised for quoting the Sky match statistics which were heavily in Stoke's favour. We were pretty poor in the 1st half and generally played like 11 strangers, but as the match went on we got better and in the end had loads more chances to score than they did; not as one sided as the Hull LC match we lost, but nearly. I don't get all the negative posts on Oatcake; if the penalty had gone in and we had converted just one other chance, we would be sitting in 9th place in the Prem now, with a point more than Bournemouth have now got. The margins are very narrow between success and failure. I don't think it is so much a case of we missed Cameron and Whelan, more a case of Adam and Bojan had an off-day and Allan reverted to what he did early in the season, rushing around to little effect. The international break did us no favours with interrupting the run we were on and Whelan being injured.
|
|
|
Post by onepara on Nov 20, 2016 18:39:31 GMT
You are not the only one. I agree with you. We were very much 2nd best first half. We missed Whelan's defensive cover and didn't have Cameron to come in to cover that. But 2nd half we did everything but score. Unlike some on here, I thought the substitutions were the right ones, but perhaps a little late. He went for a more direct approach with two strikers. That was why we had Walters not Ramadan. He could of course have kept the same system and replaced Shaq with Ramadan, or Bojan and moved Shaq to the "No.10" role but I thought 2 strikers was worth trying. Had he not already used a sub for Bardsley I think it's very likely Ramadan would have come on for Shaq. But where I disagree with you is that I think it's very harsh to describe Walters header as very easy. He made good contact on a diagonal ball and got it on target, just needed to be a couple of feet further away from the keeper I don't think we missed Whelan. What would he have done to change the course of that game. He would not have stopped the ref giving that very dubious free kick against Pieters, he would hopefully not have been meant to be defending the said free kick in the position from which we conceded ie aerial ball centre of the box. He doesn't add creativity so would not have made us more likely to score. Charlie Adam had a poor game but did not cost us a goal, uncharacteristically he was fairly useless with the ball. Bony's mobility is non existent highlighted by the fact that bringing on the never very mobile Crouch actually improved our mobility. It was a slightly disappointing performance but by no means a terrible one. I thought we deserved a draw to be honest but the squad is looking really short of pace and energy and seriously in need of freshening. How can you say that Whelan playing wouldn't have made any difference? How can you judge where a player would have been if he isn't playing? Arguably, the events would have been different.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Nov 20, 2016 19:15:54 GMT
I don't think we missed Whelan. What would he have done to change the course of that game. He would not have stopped the ref giving that very dubious free kick against Pieters, he would hopefully not have been meant to be defending the said free kick in the position from which we conceded ie aerial ball centre of the box. He doesn't add creativity so would not have made us more likely to score. Charlie Adam had a poor game but did not cost us a goal, uncharacteristically he was fairly useless with the ball. Bony's mobility is non existent highlighted by the fact that bringing on the never very mobile Crouch actually improved our mobility. It was a slightly disappointing performance but by no means a terrible one. I thought we deserved a draw to be honest but the squad is looking really short of pace and energy and seriously in need of freshening. How can you say that Whelan playing wouldn't have made any difference? How can you judge where a player would have been if he isn't playing? Arguably, the events would have been different. Its total conjecture just as saying we'd have won or wouldn't have lost with him there. At least I'm trying to add some context to the conjecture by saying judging what we know of Whelan's abilities and role in the team he would have been unlikely to be in the positions that led to the goal and he rarely adds creatively to our play so would have been unlikely to increase our chances of scoring.
|
|
|
Post by kastro on Nov 20, 2016 19:56:22 GMT
no1972 - Aren't you the one who said Sobhi was bought for marketing purposes and would be out of the club by the new year? That being said, should have definitely been in today. Smh at ignoring players in form. No I said he was brought in by the commercial department not MH and that's why he does not like playing him,why was he not starting today after his previous performances and why was he not brought on.If he his not used more the homesick get out clause will come out after the ACON in Jan. As long as you're not doubting his ability, which is obvious at this point.
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Nov 20, 2016 23:16:22 GMT
charlie adam was on 5 live earlier, he said the 2nd half display was better and we deserved to win 3 or 4 to 1 I like Charlie but this is the kind of shit that perpetuates the myth we are a good squad under achieving .we are not , We are a point a game team or worse over half a season . We now don't score enough , concede too many , only beat the bottom teams and constantly from management team down fail to address the he issues so obvious to many , and find bad luck , bad referring or just one of those days as the scapegoat . We are the table suggests just above the trap door placings with only teams above us to play before half way . We havemt beaten any of those and face the added trouble of Arsenal Chelsea and Liverpool away . We are well set for a horrible first half .
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 21, 2016 0:03:39 GMT
charlie adam was on 5 live earlier, he said the 2nd half display was better and we deserved to win 3 or 4 to 1 I like Charlie but this is the kind of shit that perpetuates the myth we are a good squad under achieving .we are not , We are a point a game team or worse over half a season . We now don't score enough , concede too many , only beat the bottom teams and constantly from management team down fail to address the he issues so obvious to many , and find bad luck , bad referring or just one of those days as the scapegoat . We are the table suggests just above the trap door placings with only teams above us to play before half way . We havemt beaten any of those and face the added trouble of Arsenal Chelsea and Liverpool away . We are well set for a horrible first half . I think I'll take Charlie's assessment ahead of your's Benji. If Bojan penalty shot had been a few inches lower and we had got the break with one of the other 6 shots on target that were saved we would now be sitting pretty in 9th place. We have lost once to teams in the bottom half of the table, most of which we have played away; that was Palace who caught us out in 11 minutes trying to play zonal defence, after which we were chasing the game. I have every confidence we will finish in the top half of the table and maybe even our best finish since 1975.
|
|
|
Post by adoptedessexstokie on Nov 21, 2016 10:12:26 GMT
I have for many years sat in the Q-Railing stand but today for the very first time in forty years I watched the game seated in the Boothen End. It certainly gave me an insight to some of the mentalities I witness on the Oatcake Fanzine. The result today made it a doubly disappointing day. Throughout the game I had to endure a cacophony of foul and abusive language directed at ref, linesman and players regardless of whether they were right or wrong eg. How the hell can you know if a player is offside or not when standing at ninety degrees to the offside line? Stoke were forced into making changes and it soon became evident that Bournemouth were the better team in the first half. I was very disappointed with Charlie Adam who was not at the races. Allen worked tirelessly with little support and our two wide football celebrities just did not turn up. The goal we conceded was very poor although it was a great delivery. I think everyone was expecting better in the second half and we immediately got a chance with a penalty. Should Bojan have been taking it. He wanted it but having kept hold of the ball he did not look confident. It was a major disappointment for him to miss as I think we could have gone on to win but heads really dropped with the miss. For thirty minutes we showed little resolve and very little width. I could understand Crouch coming on for Bony. A major disappointment! BUT Walters? Shaqiri should have taken Bojans central role leaving a wide spot for Sobhi. Judgement is affected when clouded with disappointed and poor result but Stoke City will not move on until players such as Walters, Crouch and Adam are heroes of our past. Shaqiri and Arnautovic finally came alive in the last ten minutes. They need to realise that that effort and determination is needed over the whole 90 minutes. I was hurting inside this afternoon but at no time would I ever have taken my feelings out on my fellow supporters. I've seen and experienced foul and abusive behaviour from my own supporters far too regularly this year. I have no doubt there are some great people in the Boothen End but unfortunately the few are making it a cess pit. I will not be going there again in a hurry. I shall return to the Q-Railing. I think it's always been a common theme among football fans to appeal for everything, even knowing that what they are appealing for is incorrect. I was as guilty as the next man on Saturday, & do it in the hope that it will influence the officials. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I just wish that the crowd put as much effort in to actually creating a positive atmosphere & singing some songs, as this season has been nothing short of flat.
|
|
|
Post by sonichuth on Nov 21, 2016 17:13:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Nov 22, 2016 0:34:22 GMT
Am i the only one who felt we actually played quite well yesterday. First half they bossed through their pressing but They had 2 main chances in the first half and put one away. We had: -Shawcross header cleared off the line - Bony header well saved - Missed PK - Shaq missed a sitter - Arnie missed a decent effort from outside the box - Walters missed a very easy header late on A different day and we easily could have had 3/4 You are not the only one. I agree with you. We were very much 2nd best first half. We missed Whelan's defensive cover and didn't have Cameron to come in to cover that. But 2nd half we did everything but score. Unlike some on here, I thought the substitutions were the right ones, but perhaps a little late. He went for a more direct approach with two strikers. That was why we had Walters not Ramadan. He could of course have kept the same system and replaced Shaq with Ramadan, or Bojan and moved Shaq to the "No.10" role but I thought 2 strikers was worth trying. Had he not already used a sub for Bardsley I think it's very likely Ramadan would have come on for Shaq. But where I disagree with you is that I think it's very harsh to describe Walters header as very easy. He made good contact on a diagonal ball and got it on target, just needed to be a couple of feet further away from the keeper Revisionist history. You need to give your heads a wobble. We were dreadful.
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Nov 22, 2016 0:38:06 GMT
Am i the only one who felt we actually played quite well yesterday. First half they bossed through their pressing but They had 2 main chances in the first half and put one away. We had: -Shawcross header cleared off the line - Bony header well saved - Missed PK - Shaq missed a sitter - Arnie missed a decent effort from outside the box - Walters missed a very easy header late on A different day and we easily could have had 3/4 You are not the only one. I agree with you. We were very much 2nd best first half. We missed Whelan's defensive cover and didn't have Cameron to come in to cover that. But 2nd half we did everything but score. Unlike some on here, I thought the substitutions were the right ones, but perhaps a little late. He went for a more direct approach with two strikers. That was why we had Walters not Ramadan. He could of course have kept the same system and replaced Shaq with Ramadan, or Bojan and moved Shaq to the "No.10" role but I thought 2 strikers was worth trying. Had he not already used a sub for Bardsley I think it's very likely Ramadan would have come on for Shaq. But where I disagree with you is that I think it's very harsh to describe Walters header as very easy. He made good contact on a diagonal ball and got it on target, just needed to be a couple of feet further away from the keeper Nail on head. Sometimes, Hughes is mind-blowingly dim.
|
|
|
Post by TexasPotter on Nov 22, 2016 16:20:51 GMT
It was one of those days where no shot will go in for you. Poor performance from the player's who couldn't do the basics from passing, tackling and movement. The answer? We reverted to longball out of no options. I took away from that we really miss the grafters in Whelan and Cameron allowing others to be more creative and need to find replacements asap.
|
|