Graffito Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 Gifted a penalty??????? I agree that it looks like a penalty on this clip so I can see how it was given, especially in the fog, but it happened right in front of me and I, and one or two around me, said immediately it was not a penalty. In any case it doesn't matter because it counts for nothing.
Arizona Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 Sorry Griffito, but that's as blatant a penalty as you will see all season. The goalie just ran out and booted him in the leg. The fact that the 'keeper does a pirouette and ends up on his arse would imply he gave him a fair whack, and he clearly got nowhere near the ball.
Mao Cap Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 Colchester ALWAYS beat us home and away, and it's always a really crap day out (even more so now they have a God-awful bland new ground in the middle of bleeding nowhere with no pubs, atmosphere or good transport links - thank God I didn't go). Hardly a good reason to hold anything against them, though - smallish club with nice fans doing the best they can with not very much. Days like this just happen, best to take it on the chin and move on.
alpine_saint Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 What a totally shambolic football club. I have just spent along with Harwell Saint, my wife and 1700 odd other Saints fans an afternoon of shocking proportions. 1 A Boothroyd. A terrible manager who is a disgrace to football. His teams are crude, cheat, timewaste, ugly and most of the time hoof it up the pitch. The future of english football for sure. Arsene Wenger beware. Even the ballboys wasted time and the pitch had been narrowed and was bobbly as anything to suit his bully boy tatics and prevent good football. 2 The "Stadium" has no atmosphere and is full of idiots who don't sing and turn up and watch that rubbish every week. 3 They have the temerity to charge £5-00 to park in the club car park and then make you sit there for over an hour after the game. In a modern "stadium" that has only been recently built, the traffic was horrendous. 4 Ah i here some of you say, Sour Grapes. Yes for the first 20mins, not good, but due to a completely inept performance from the ref and linesman we may have even won. I will never return to that dump again and will never pay good money to watch that **** served up by Boothroyds teams again. The problem is that these tactics work, and we have to get past all this sh*t to get back to the top echelon. I am more concerned by the fact that Saints managers are obsessed with playing pretty football (for this level), and are unable to get "ugly" when the situation demands it. Burley was incapable too.
battlingbob Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 no one has mentioned the turnstyles that didnt work and worse thing of all the pa system that didnt work bearing in mind the weather god forbid if something seriouse had happened i did hear that someone collapsed in the stan total disgrace for a new stadium
Toomer Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 How many times has a Boothroyd team had us over, if we are not clever or cute enonough to overcome this who is to blame, not Boothroyd he sets his team up to play to their strengths.
SaintRobbie Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 The problem is that these tactics work, and we have to get past all this sh*t to get back to the top echelon. I am more concerned by the fact that Saints managers are obsessed with playing pretty football (for this level), and are unable to get "ugly" when the situation demands it. Burley was incapable too. AS you say Alps, Colchester may squeeze through playing like this, but will relegate soon after. Saints will get there playing football, stay there, build and rise again to the Premiership. Pardew is not about one promotion - he''s declared he's after the Premier League in 5 years. So, keep it up Pards I say.
alpine_saint Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 AS you say Alps, Colchester may squeeze through playing like this, but will relegate soon after. Saints will get there playing football, stay there, build and rise again to the Premiership. Pardew is not about one promotion - he''s declared he's after the Premier League in 5 years. So, keep it up Pards I say. He's getting his team selections wrong, and the team lacks mental and physical strength still. I am sure he will get it right, but for now, I am concerned.
SaintRobbie Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 He's getting his team selections wrong, and the team lacks mental and physical strength still. I am sure he will get it right, but for now, I am concerned. He's got us from minus 10 points and certain relegation to beyond mid-table. I agree we still need to remove some of the old Lowe kids though - James for one needs to be replaced. Yes, we do need some more physical strength - dunno about mental though, I think thats there, we have some superbly dedicated players and a motivating manager. Its still early days for Pards to be fair, not quite his team completely yet.
dune Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 I was expecting this to be a boring away day and it was. The Norfolk was OK before the game and the shuttle bus scheme worked well. As for their stadium it was exactly what i was expecting because that's all these small lower league lubs can afford/fill. However the worst part of the day was our support and how our team played in the first half. In respect of our support it was a classic supporters coach atmosphere. I can't get my head around what possible pleasure can be got out of travlling down on a supporters coach and arriving 1 hour before k/o - judging by the dour and lifeless showing they put in the answer is none.
shurlock Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 (edited) AS you say Alps, Colchester may squeeze through playing like this, but will relegate soon after. Saints will get there playing football, stay there, build and rise again to the Premiership. Pardew is not about one promotion - he''s declared he's after the Premier League in 5 years. So, keep it up Pards I say. When the likes of Boothroyd are considered the bright young things in the game, no wonder why an englishman is unlikely to manage the national side anytime soon. Lets not kid ourselves either - Pards isn't playing pretty football. Whenever he's criticised the side, its usually been for not getting the ball up quicker to the front men. For better or for worse, we're currently a long-ball side, though I trust this is pragmatic rather than philosophical. Edited 29 December, 2009 by shurlock
Griffo Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 I was expecting this to be a boring away day and it was. The Norfolk was OK before the game and the shuttle bus scheme worked well. As for their stadium it was exactly what i was expecting because that's all these small lower league lubs can afford/fill. However the worst part of the day was our support and how our team played in the first half. In respect of our support it was a classic supporters coach atmosphere. I can't get my head around what possible pleasure can be got out of travlling down on a supporters coach and arriving 1 hour before k/o - judging by the dour and lifeless showing they put in the answer is none. It was awful. A lot sat, and when some people a few rows down stood up to watch the penalty, a guy behind shouted for the people standing in front to sit down! :confused:
JRM Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 It was awful. A lot sat, and when some people a few rows down stood up to watch the penalty, a guy behind shouted for the people standing in front to sit down! :confused: I agree with yourself and the previous poster, don't understand why people bother travelling and then don't get behind the team at all, looking at some of them sitting there completely lifeless and disinterested I reckon they must put something in the travel club tea.
Chez Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 The problem is that these tactics work, and we have to get past all this sh*t to get back to the top echelon. I am more concerned by the fact that Saints managers are obsessed with playing pretty football (for this level), and are unable to get "ugly" when the situation demands it. Burley was incapable too. you could not be more wrong if you tried. We played nothing but ugly football. Hoof it up to the big man, whack it down the channels, safety first clear your lines every single time ********. Four six foot defenders, five men in midfield and a big target man. What more could you ask for? In my opinion we didn't play nearly enough football, pretty or otherwise. The best footballing sides win the league, whatever it is. Rochdale, Leeds, Newcastle, Chelsea - all footballing sides. You have to do the ugly things like chase back, get stuck in, win headers, chase lost causes, but when you gain posession pretty football is essential in my book. OK so the right choices need to be made by defenders when to bring it down and when to get rid, but yesterday all we ever did was boot it long and when we did play it short the likes of Antonio and James didn't have the touch to keep it.
Griffo Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 I agree with yourself and the previous poster, don't understand why people bother travelling and then don't get behind the team at all, looking at some of them sitting there completely lifeless and disinterested I reckon they must put something in the travel club tea. Me neither. I don't get what they get out of travelling miles to watch their team, just to sit there and politely clap a goal and to tell people to sit down who are actually supporting the team.
Toadhall Saint Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 the exact same crap was said about the billy davies Are you his love child TDD?
JRM Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 you could not be more wrong if you tried. We played nothing but ugly football. Hoof it up to the big man, whack it down the channels, safety first clear your lines every single time ********. Four six foot defenders, five men in midfield and a big target man. What more could you ask for? In my opinion we didn't play nearly enough football, pretty or otherwise. The best footballing sides win the league, whatever it is. Rochdale, Leeds, Newcastle, Chelsea - all footballing sides. You have to do the ugly things like chase back, get stuck in, win headers, chase lost causes, but when you gain posession pretty football is essential in my book. OK so the right choices need to be made by defenders when to bring it down and when to get rid, but yesterday all we ever did was boot it long and when we did play it short the likes of Antonio and James didn't have the touch to keep it. Correct. Our passing was dreadful, defenders looked to bypass the midfield almost everytime, we gave the ball away constantly and lobbing up to Lambert is asking him to do too much with no players supporting him. One decent move we had was an excellent through ball by Schneiderlin to Antonio who cut in only to lose his head and put in his usual poor cross rather than play it across the 6 yard line for Lambert running in.
ericofarabia Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 Re the roads / parking etc. There was a post from a Colchester fan (Post match chat ?)basically explaining that the whole area was being redeveloped, but because Colchester got promoted to The Chumpionship 2 years ago the ground got fast tracked ahead of all the other work, it will probably all be okay when everything else has caught up AP said in his post match chat that he was not happy at all at things that were going on both on and off the pitch and mentioned off the ball incidents, surrounding the ref and intentional delays in the ball being put back into play especially near the end as a few examples. From his tone you could tell that he didn't think very highly of these sort of tactics being used. We knew it was coming, but like all bar 2 teams to visit them this season we couldn't cope with it. You have to feel sorry for The U's fans having to watch that style of football week in week out but I guess you won't hear them complaining much if they reach The Play offs. :cool:
saintpat Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 We didn't play football, no one was composed or effective with the ball. Colchester were quicker and more aggressive than us, we bottled a few challenges. Yes Colchester aren't pretty and I wouldn't want to watch them every week, but they are effective and punching above their weight due to using their resources very well. We didn't use our resources well and lost. Unlike Pardew, I don't think we deserved anything from the game, although he is correct in questioning some of the Colchester tactics, on and off the pitch. Yes the officials were poor and I'm sure the ball boys were following instructions. The ball boy incident was very poor, although his reaction did not help. Anyone else think that the 8-10 year old with the yellow jacket is just an asbo waiting to happen? His parents must be really proud!! As for the bloke who was screaming at Lloyd James all game- change the f'ing record, you're really boring!
benjii Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 The problem is that these tactics work, and we have to get past all this sh*t to get back to the top echelon. I am more concerned by the fact that Saints managers are obsessed with playing pretty football (for this level), and are unable to get "ugly" when the situation demands it. Burley was incapable too. This just shows that you have no clue how we play. We are far from pretty. In fact, we are probably the most direct we have been since Branfoot.
Jackie@home Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 Colchester might get away with these tactics at League One level, but you know that when you move up through the leagues the officials are stronger and don't let them get away with it to the same degree. It's success can only be limited and it's certainly not what I want to watch. You wouldn't get 31,000 at St. Mary's for that kind of football, even if we were third in the table. The annoying thing is that we are all supposed to be playing to the same rules, but you certainly notice a difference when you occasionally get a top-flight ref and these tactics get stamped quickly.
benjii Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 He's getting his team selections wrong, and the team lacks mental and physical strength still. I am sure he will get it right, but for now, I am concerned. Better get a new sports psychologist. It doesn't. It lacks a right back, a left winger and a chap sitting on the bench called Waigo.
Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 It was awful. A lot sat, and when some people a few rows down stood up to watch the penalty, a guy behind shouted for the people standing in front to sit down! :confused: Should have moved like I did, I was sat for about 20 minutes of the first half, thought 'sod this', got up and moved down the ground until I found a decent place up the back to stand.
John B Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 You wouldn't get 31,000 at St. Mary's for that kind of football, even if we were third in the table. QUOTE] Of course you would it is results which count
surrey1saint Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 Me neither. I don't get what they get out of travelling miles to watch their team, just to sit there and politely clap a goal and to tell people to sit down who are actually supporting the team. I will never understand this mentality either.....why bother?
RonManager Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 I will never understand this mentality either.....why bother? I guess what you are seeing is a cross section of SMS, on a smaller scale. These people probably don't sing at SMS either, but want to watch their team, fair enough. I was up the back and we never stopped - as the game went on, more and more people arrived, attracted from other parts. The slightly scary, somewhat 'over-friendly' steward didn't mind at all as we were all standing and at one point there were definitely more people than seats! So what you end up with is a number of clumps of singers, all doing their own thing. Some L1 grounds sill have terracing eg Bristol Rovers, so all the singers can find each other. My opinion on their style of football is that I have watched this game for decades and I would not want to see Saints playing like that every game - however, now and then, it is productive. I was listening to some Col U fans chatting round the burger stand before the match and they were hoping for a 'game of football' for once, rather than the usual 'Boothroyd Bash Up'! [unquote] This 'multiball' system needs to be applied to all clubs or nothing, IMO. The instructions given by the club to the ballboys were a disgrace and very unsporting, not even subtle, yet the officials seemed unable to do anything. I wonder if the issue will be raised at the FL monthly meeting? Oh, and by the way, for the future - it only takes 25 minutes to walk from the railway station to the ground for those who like a stroll. On the way out I overshot the roundabout and was well on my way to Norwich before my internal GPS system started ringing the alarm bells!! Are we due a partial refund because we only saw part of the game? Keep the faith COYR
Jackie@home Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 John B, there is not one team in the league, Premier or Championship, who gets 31,000 for boring, hoofing long ball. All the teams that play in this way are the teams with amongst the smallest gates for their division. Besides, at this level of gate you are attracting the neutral who just wish to watch a good game of football - we wouldn't attract them with the Boothroyd style.
Thedelldays Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 John B, there is not one team in the league, Premier or Championship, who gets 31,000 for boring, hoofing long ball. All the teams that play in this way are the teams with amongst the smallest gates for their division. Besides, at this level of gate you are attracting the neutral who just wish to watch a good game of football - we wouldn't attract them with the Boothroyd style. forest, derby..?
Jackie@home Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 Forest certainly haven't been playing like that this season. Davies has had some money to buy better footballers, and it shows. Just proves that most managers only play this way because of lack of resources - the majority will change their style if they can. Even under Branfoot we once won 6 games in a row, but we don't look back on it with fondness because the football was so dire - our gates were v. low at the time also.
Ekelund24 Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 In there defence, they play a physical direct attacking style and scored (what looked like in the stadium) two very good goals, where a weighted pass split our defence twice and the forward placed the ball in the net. I don't care too much for the time wasting or cheating but they were the better team for most of the game, although on another day we would've had a bit of luck with our shots on target. I think the turnstile issue was more with the user rather than the actual turnstile!! And the Chicken Balti Pies were fantastic :-)
Sour Mash Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 What a load of moaning old sour grapes. We were beaten by a better team on the day, wasn't the best day out in the world, but then who really expected it to be? Saints could learn a bit from Colchester about getting results from limited resources.
red&white56 Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 I agree that it looks like a penalty on this clip so I can see how it was given, especially in the fog, but it happened right in front of me and I, and one or two around me, said immediately it was not a penalty. In any case it doesn't matter because it counts for nothing. I was stood right behind the goal (at ground level) and I wasn't convinced it was a penalty either but this clip is convincing............. If only their goalie hadn't made a couple of really great saves we might have clinched a draw..............
red&white56 Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 One big positive from this game - the slow version of OWTS was given a good airing, I even heard the Woolston Ferry (well done to those who kicked that one off) being sung but I couldn't remember the words to join in - sorry!
RonManager Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 One big positive from this game - the slow version of OWTS was given a good airing, I even heard the Woolston Ferry (well done to those who kicked that one off) being sung but I couldn't remember the words to join in - sorry! And it got better each time as more people started to understand. Hopefully that will transfer back to SMS. Just as AP's team is still a work in progress, so are we in terms of getting the singing sorted out!
RedAndWhite91 Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 5. After queueing 15 minutes for food, all they had left was a sh!t hot dog which cost £4.
Didcot Saint Posted 29 December, 2009 Author Posted 29 December, 2009 You wouldn't get 31,000 at St. Mary's for that kind of football, even if we were third in the table. QUOTE] Of course you would it is results which count You must be taking the mickey, plain stupid or know nothing about football.
Michelle Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 One big positive from this game - the slow version of OWTS was given a good airing, I even heard the Woolston Ferry (well done to those who kicked that one off) being sung but I couldn't remember the words to join in - sorry! That'll be our half a dozen who were at the back. Agree with the slow OWTS - needs to be given two full rounds slow before we kick in at normal speed. Oh, and normal speed does not mean super-duper fast speed - usually goes from one extreme to the other, which is just crazy!
Andy_Porter Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 You must be taking the mickey, plain stupid or know nothing about football. It is results which count, I know loads of plastic fans who only going whne either they get a free ticket of someone who can't go or when we're winning. They are all out in force at the minute going to every home game and not one of them has complained about the football on offer. We where **** against Exeter and at times looked worse with 10 men, the people who I know who went all thought we where excellent on the day. It's just winning and goals that matter to the majority.
John B Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 You must be taking the mickey, plain stupid or know nothing about football. You such seem to be someone who could moan for England. It is results which count not pretty football. But Pretty Football with results would be good
derry Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 talking out of your ar$e - there are plenty of good honest clubs around - don't be a sanctimonious kn*b. point is that they spoiled the game and ******ed over any notion of sportsmanship. point is boothroyd's got a history - recall the red towels given to ballboys to dry and wipe the ball at Watford, a privilege not afforded to visiting sides. fine if they get away with it but doesn't mean others have to tolerate let alone justify it. Last time he was at SMS with Watford their two long throw specialists were the only people wearing gloves because it was very mild. He doesn't miss a trick.
derry Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 you could not be more wrong if you tried. We played nothing but ugly football. Hoof it up to the big man, whack it down the channels, safety first clear your lines every single time ********. Four six foot defenders, five men in midfield and a big target man. What more could you ask for? In my opinion we didn't play nearly enough football, pretty or otherwise. The best footballing sides win the league, whatever it is. Rochdale, Leeds, Newcastle, Chelsea - all footballing sides. You have to do the ugly things like chase back, get stuck in, win headers, chase lost causes, but when you gain posession pretty football is essential in my book. OK so the right choices need to be made by defenders when to bring it down and when to get rid, but yesterday all we ever did was boot it long and when we did play it short the likes of Antonio and James didn't have the touch to keep it. Spot on.
derry Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 This multi ball system could be good if the ballboys were left to do the same for both teams or neutral. If that is not happening the referee/linesmen should intervene and revert to one ball. The next time we play a team that abuses the multiball we should refuse to use it and insist on one ball. In my view, one ball only is the fairest way.
Tractor_Saint Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 In my view, one ball only is the fairest way. Disagree - liked the song "One ball, you've only got one ball". Maybe had the ballboys actually tried to do their job then the one ball might have worked but they were useless and (I think it was) the 4th official that had words with the ballboys after Pardew complained in the 2nd half once the Saints fans had a go at that muppet ballboy rhs of the goal.
hackedoff Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 And they had the nerve to build their new stadium in a crappy,industrial end of town !
jam Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 you could not be more wrong if you tried. We played nothing but ugly football. Hoof it up to the big man, whack it down the channels, safety first clear your lines every single time ********. Four six foot defenders, five men in midfield and a big target man. What more could you ask for? In my opinion we didn't play nearly enough football, pretty or otherwise. The best footballing sides win the league, whatever it is. Rochdale, Leeds, Newcastle, Chelsea - all footballing sides. You have to do the ugly things like chase back, get stuck in, win headers, chase lost causes, but when you gain posession pretty football is essential in my book. OK so the right choices need to be made by defenders when to bring it down and when to get rid, but yesterday all we ever did was boot it long and when we did play it short the likes of Antonio and James didn't have the touch to keep it. Indeed. And to me it is noticable that we are more effective and more in control of games when we play 'pretty' football. As in we pass the ball around quickly, more off the ball and fashion openings for ourselves. My biggest criticism of Pardew (and I've felt this way ALL season) is that he seems happy to have the ball kicked long time and again when we don't have the personal to make that system work for us but we do have a squad full of ball players.
jam Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 This multi ball system could be good if the ballboys were left to do the same for both teams or neutral. If that is not happening the referee/linesmen should intervene and revert to one ball. The next time we play a team that abuses the multiball we should refuse to use it and insist on one ball. In my view, one ball only is the fairest way. Simple to stop it. Wait until the ball goes into the away fans, hold onto it then lob it back on the pitch as soon as the game restarts. The ref'll soon revert to using one ball.
Wadge Posted 29 December, 2009 Posted 29 December, 2009 The problem with the ball boys was that they were about 15, and looked like youth team players being made to do it, and to be honest looked like they didn't want to be there. My 99 year old gran could have got the ball quicker. The ball boy in question didn't make his life any easier by bouncing it and taking the **** though. We lost as we were shat first half, should have played 2 up top, once Connolly came on we actually had some movement. With 5 in midfield we didn't pass the ball about and use the width enough, but even we they did, Antonio spooned it out. No-one supported Lambert enough first half who had an ineffective game, but he had a lot to do with no support. Their first goal was right in front of me, which in my view was Jaidi's fault, and even my missus asked why no-one went with the runner. Thomas sat off too much first half and didn't get the tackle in. Once we took the game too them at 442 we looked better, but if we are playing 451 Lallana has got to be given a free role and support Lambert more.
RedAndWhite91 Posted 30 December, 2009 Posted 30 December, 2009 That smug ball boy needed a slap. I hated that ground.
oxfordshire_saint Posted 30 December, 2009 Posted 30 December, 2009 Yes the officials were poor and I'm sure the ball boys were following instructions. The ball boy incident was very poor, although his reaction did not help. Anyone else think that the 8-10 year old with the yellow jacket is just an asbo waiting to happen? His parents must be really proud!! Yup, he took a swing at the ballboy didn't he? The timewasting was a stupid thing to do on the ballboy's part, in front of a stand full of frustrated opposition fans, but the older lads who had to be held back by the stewards, grow up!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now