saintjay77

Id say they were still better than some of the dross we were left with. But wouldnt have any of them ahead of the players we have now.

If we are still in League 1 and spend around the same again in the summer I think we have every reason to expect automatic promotion but based on starting the season with half the team we have now on a very low moral and -10 points the money spent has been to get us on par with some of the top teams in this league. Give us the 10 points back and we are just 3 points off the playoff's. in that kind of position we would probably be looking to try and catch the top 2 rather than just aiming for the playoffs. That said, if we started the season on equal points with our current team I think we would be fighting for the top 2 spots and our 1st 10 games or so were hampered by the -10.

The tough thing is making the decissions at that time. The ref is trying to decide 1st if its a foul, 2nd where it is and 3rd if the player should get a yellow or red card. I am in favour of video replays but I still am not sure of what point the video replays should be used. Goal line incodents? 6 yard box? 18 yard box? 18 yard line right across the pitch? final 3rd of the pitch or all over? Then if its only used in the 18 yard box the replay would have shown that the incodent was out of the box and therefor the replay shouldnt have been used which would start another argument off. Similar arguments could be made for all the option tbh. I dont want technology to take over but would like to find a way it could help the officials get more decissions right and in turn make them better ref's. I agree with harsher punishments for cheating but think the only way that can happen is in retrospec (which often gets done for violent conduct) If a player deliberatly brings down a player outside the box to avoid a penalty (effectivly cheating) then someone should look at it after the game and decide if the ref's punnishment was enough. If not then issue cards or ban's and sit back to watch how many players cut the cheating out. Same goes for dive's. The ref cant be expected to get everything right so some after help in sorting out the cheaters would do the game the world of good.

Would have loved to have seen Ince's face when that one went in. lol

But a club will eventually lose players by picking up too many yellow cards and often its been important players in big games. I think the most synical was Beckams yellow card that got his suspension out of the way while he knew he was injured and about to be laid off for a couple of games. What ever system or rule is in place there will be a way of exploiting it. I think ref's need more help as sometimes the pressure is too much and too often they are spoiling the game for someone or another. It would be nice to see more games where the football effected the game rather than a dodgy decission.

TBF if the ref didnt see something he shouldnt be giving anything either way. If he thinks something happened that he didnt see he should ask the lino that had a better view and make a decission based on that. He saw Seaborne close the attacker down and then he saw through Morgan to see the attacker fall over and guessed it was a foul so gave it. Others have said these decissions usually even themselves out over a season or 2 so everyone just gets on with it. How that ref can then go on to ref a prem game is beyond me though and as is said above, the way ref's are judged by assessors may have a big part to play. Maybe judged by independant football people would work better and have a half way between wthe way it was done and the way its done now?

cheers

think those highlights showed a bit more of the Dons having a go and seeing the Pen decission again makes me think Fonte went down a bit theatrically. Was still a pen as he clipped him but he still made the most of it to make sure. Why was Fonte up that end anyway? Did he get switched to LB or was he up for a corner?

Ah I thought it was telephone transactions. Can understand it for postal as every booking is treated seperatly and more time consuming I guess. I thought the only way round it was to queue up and get it from the booking office. Could have charged a waiting fee for standing in the queue so long. lol

Cant be far off. lol

I can understand the questioning though. A comment was made about someone having to pay £33 in booking fee's. 1 booking for 11 people. Why not just £3? or a reduction as customer is saving work? all 11 people could have phoned up to get there own ticket and created 11 times as much work. Can understand why the customer would feel a bit peeved. But the club cant go round making tiny adjustments all over the place as the system would get far too complicated and waste too much time and money. Its one of them things that cant be helped IMO.

Looking at the last 6 games we have the same record as Milwall yet they get 3 players in there. 4 wins 1 draw and 1 loss. Unless there Loss was in last month where as ours was more recent. Only Norwich has better form for the last 6 games with Milwall equall to us. Would be interesting to find out how they work it out.

Think that ringing round Wembley would be awsome and would be well deserved. True saint and deserves the award. One Herbie Taylor!

Andy Oldcow possibly? He didnt seem to stick around for long thats for sure.

Rupes was never one for taking advice from people he considered to be of a lower standing than himself. (nob) I like the way NC is doing things and would be happy even if there wasnt such a big finacial backing. He knows where he wants the club to get to and he will create a plan to get it there based on what is available to us. I cant see him commiting too much or not enough and his decissions are all based on sound advice.

Cant help agree with you on that. Looking past Rupes being a complete pillock the ideas behind him were in general the right things to do. The choices he made on the back of those ideas were awful where as the choices NC has made so far seem to be pretty good. The money behind him must help but it cant be just about that can it?

Great result and gives us hope to keep fighting till the end. Based on our preformances against the better teams I fancy our chances if we can make it to the play off's and think we have a team that wouldnt look out of place in the CCC. Still a slim chance of getting into that top 6 but results like these when the ref is on a wind up will do loads for the confidence and belieff in the sqaud.

Surley its not just about segragation inside the ground though? Fans I guess will go to one side or the other to get in and having fans split this way must be easier to manage for the police. Not that our trip there is a grudge match or anything but 44000 fans cant be an easy lot to cope with even on a good day.

It still looks to me that Seaborne closed him down quickly, (being around 10 yards from the goal I think thats a good decission) unsuccesfully tried to turn Edds towards the goal line instead of accross the 6 yard area and Edds went the other way and over his leg. Its the kind of decission that goes either way in plenty of matches. The problem however, is how restricted the ref's view of the tackle is. If all he can see is an obstructed view then his decission on a Pen or not is a guess at best. Did anyone see if the Lino waved his flag furiously because he saw a foul? Question for the Ref's on here though. If you had an unsighted view of a penalty box incodent would you give a decission to either side or wave play on? And if you a video replay was available which gave you a better view of the incodent would you feel it would help or hinder any decission?

If someone goes down in the penalty box its usually either a dive or a foul. 8 out of 10 times the ref has a clear view and makes his own decission. sometimes he doesnt have a clear view like Sat and makes a dodgy decission or no decission at all. If he had the chance to see a replay from an angle that he cant see, (I am only suggesting 1 different view to avoid replays from 15 different camera's) it should give him a better chance to make a more informed decission. He may still have given the penalty or he may have given us a free kick for a dive. If the ref has a clear view then there should be no need for him to waste time with a replay. There shouldnt be many times in a match that the ref could do with it so the FA could also use the use of the technology as a measure on how well a ref controls a game. I am still sure there is a way of bringing in the use of technology without slowing the game down. The technology is there ready to be used. All the Footballing world need to do is to find a way it can be used to benifit the game rather than ruining it. Excuses of how it will take over and cause problems are IMO a bit extreme as if it were to be brought in then it would soon be overhaulled if it was causing more problems than benifits.

I would never ask for technology to replace the need for the officials to make a decission so if the ref decides there was nothing happening then he doesnt blow the whistle. Thats his judgment and the game carry's on. If he thinks its 50/50 on it being a foul or not then he knows he can blow and take a look at the replay. It only needs to be shown once or twice for him to make a more informed decission. It always stays his decission and there is always the chance he will still get it wrong so human error is not taken out of the game. So play would only stop when the ref wants it to stop. If he is sure he saw nothing and play should carry on then it does. If that is a mistake and he didnt use the help that is available to him then he will have to answer to the FA. Its in the refs best interest to get decissions right so the result is a fair one. If he is not a very good referee then he will get found out and it will be easier for the FA to deal with it. It should in time produce a better level of referee's at all levels. I dont want a stop start system that slows the game to a crawl but I believe the technology is there to assist referee's in the decissions they make. Maybe if they were making the right decissions more often the respect from the players and managers would return that would also help there respect campaign.

Of course Rugby is a completly different sport, as is Tenis and Cricket. But these sports have found a way to acomodate video technology without slowing down or ruining the game. Cricket is constantly evolving its use of technology and I guess it will continue to do so untill it has a balence between human judgement and hi-tech wizardry. Football is standing still and more and more games are being ruined by some pretty bad decissions. IMO the officials need help and the use of technology is well over due. Watching a game on sky and the ref misses something, it takes no more than 30 secs to see a replay showing what they missed. If a replay system was in use on Sat the ref may well have decided his view was impared by Morgan so could have asked for a replay. no more than 1 minute would have passed for him to make a more informed decission. Still his decission, he could still make the wrong decission giving fans something to talk about after the game and the game would not have stopped for any longer than it did with players argueing the case. Same the other end, He saw Barny go down but gave the benifit of doubt to the defender. He could have just made sure with a quick replay. After the game had he not used the help that was available he would have been judged on poor decissions. The game would still have its controversy and would move as fast as it does now. But the officials would get more respect as more often than not they would make the right decissions. IMO its worth trying in some capacity and football needs to move forward

Thing is, there is no come back that helps anyone when a jumped up clueless llittle midget ruins a game. By which point 3 points have been won or lost. Having the assistance of video technology leaves no excuse for a ref to cokc it up and greater penaltys can be imposed on him to stop him cokcing future games up. If the technology is there and he fails to use it to confirm some key decissions then he is just leaving himself more open to a demotion down the leagues. I bet Rugby fans said it would never work in there sport too. I dont want it to take over Football but think it can be a massive help to the officials and it should cut out poor decissions making or wrecking a clubs campaign.

Ah fair enough. I was trying to say it wasnt obstruction but was also trying to say it wasnt a foul either. It was a 50/50 and if the ref had given us ours earlier everyone would be saying that he just evened it up. Which is not right in its self but seems to be more accepted. If TV replay was in use it would only have helped if the ref had asked for it. He may have done for that Pen but he waved play on for our pen shouts so we could have been done anyway. Somehow the FA or who ever need to make the officials more accountable whilst giving them the tools to make the correct decissions. Fans of high level Rugby dont complain too often about shocking ref's and generally leave thinking there team should have done better, were 2nd best or deserved the result.

http://www.skysports.com/football/match_video/0,26719,11065_3151228,00.html 50 seconds in. He ran in and turned to his left. Opo went the other way and went over Seabornes leg. Its not obstruction if you dont move so Seaborne had every right to be there and hold his position. I do agree however that it was a 50/50 one and its pot luck if its given or not. Had the ref not missed blatent penaltys earlier in the match I doubt there would be as much debate on this one.