doddisalegend Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Highlights up on the BBC they've managed to make it look like WH was all over us they must have shown every chance WHU had:x. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/15377004.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Angel Gabriel Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 In line with reports in the national press. It's big club syndrome. Every week in the prem, win or lose, we were "lowly" or "struggling" Saints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Typical London club bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rory Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Seems fair to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 I have to say, seeing that, that we rode our luck a little more than seemed so on the night. Still, never mind, eh, Sam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 20 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Seems fair to me. the bbc own stats say we had 9 attempts on target (and another 9 off target for 18 attempts on goal) they showed four of them West ham had 10 chances on and off target they showed 5 of them. Just makes West ham look better than they were IMO. The joys of highlights I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Who cares if they show a bias against us? If we carry on as we are they are going to look increasingly stupid. It was fair enough to call us struggling or lowly Southampton when we were in the Premiership, because mostly we were. But at the same time, so were West Ham. But West Ham were last year's Premiership side in second place, whereas the season before we were in the third division. I'm sure that they might have anticipated WH giving us a thrashing, but despite the number of chances of WH's they showed, it was us who gave them a lesson in how to play football properly. If we continue in this vein, there will come a time when this is recognised and we and NA are given due credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_John Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 The Sky highlights are here http://www.skysports.com/football/match_video/0,26719,11065_3407844,00.html They show Chaplow shot plus the "tip over" from Davis and a few seconds more to the build up to DeRidder's goal. HOWEVER, and it is a BIG however, "DeRidder was offside" (I think not) and the HOOF ball team "deserved a point" (I think NOT) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayrivers Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 I didn't go to the game but hust watched the all angles covered highlights on Saints player... Looked like we rode our luck at times, but they rode theirs more so? Their defending was sloppy at best at times. Our passing game seemed to tear them apart at times. Looking at saints player highlights we deserved 3 points? Of course those highlights are probably bias towards southampton. Also Kelvin had a great game by the looks of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintoaks Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Interesting to see Danny Fox and a WHU player refusing to shake hands at the end...What was that all about ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 First time Ive seen the De Ridder "goal". Off side? WTF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 20 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 20 October, 2011 First time Ive seen the De Ridder "goal". Off side? WTF? It wasn't offside It was pulled back for the push on one of our players in the buildup to the goal instead of the goal ref gave us a free kick..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 It wasn't offside It was pulled back for the push on one of our players in the buildup to the goal instead of the goal ref gave us a free kick..... Ahh, make more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 20 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Ahh, make more sense. Bloody annoying though was doing my nut at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dellman Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Let BBC and London papers say what they want, we won the match and we are 5 points clear and thre's a lot to be said for not having to much 'hype' around us and having all the pressure on the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 The Sky highlights are here http://www.skysports.com/football/match_video/0,26719,11065_3407844,00.html They show Chaplow shot plus the "tip over" from Davis and a few seconds more to the build up to DeRidder's goal. HOWEVER, and it is a BIG however, "DeRidder was offside" (I think not) and the HOOF ball team "deserved a point" (I think NOT) Flagged offside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Immaterial how the BBC portray our games, except that as fans we'd like to see more of our team, but what matters is how Saints play, not how the BBC shows them. If mis-reporting by the BBC made other clubs over-confident it might be a factor but clubs have their own full videos of Saints games, just as SFC has videos of the opposition. The rest know how good this team is and even if the BBC say we don't deserve to be winning games, the league table tells a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkSFC Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 "17 game unbeaten home run slightly dilutes what really is an epic run of victories!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 (edited) It wasn't offside It was pulled back for the push on one of our players in the buildup to the goal instead of the goal ref gave us a free kick..... Harding got chopped down outside the area shortly after he played the ball through to De Ridder, it was definitely a yellow card for the WHU player but surely that's what the advantage rule is for!? Book him after FFS. West Ham had some good chances but I don't think they deserved a point out of it as the Sky commentator said. We were the better team for long periods of the game and aside from the last 10 minutes West Ham barely put any consistent pressure on our defence. It's not really a 'bias' as some people are saying, but after our time in the L1 wilderness I think the media have mostly forgotten about us. Thankfully a 32k sellout and winning 3 points against 2nd place as well as increasing our lead at the top to 5 points might do something to change that... Edited 20 October, 2011 by SuperMikey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 20 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Harding got chopped down outside the area shortly after he played the ball through to De Ridder, it was definitely a yellow card for the WHU player but surely that's what the advantage rule is for!? Book him after FFS. Yep couldn't understand it reckon the ref had a £100 on a 1-0 result.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy_D Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 "17 game unbeaten home run slightly dilutes what really is an epic run of victories!!! Epic is right! If I saw a run like that on someone's Football Manager save, I'd probably accuse them of save scumming. How long was our previous best run? I remember being frustrated so many times because we'd got close to it or equalled it and then failed to break it... Seems fairly safe to say that once it comes to an end we'll never see it broken. (Especially as we could well end up extending it a fair few more games yet) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Jazzbo Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 I listened to Steve Claridge on 5 live after the game. To be fair, he thought we just deserved the win. He also said that he'd seen us 4 times this season, and if we continue to play in the way we have, he could'nt see anyone catching us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekelund24 Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Harding got chopped down outside the area shortly after he played the ball through to De Ridder, it was definitely a yellow card for the WHU player but surely that's what the advantage rule is for!? Book him after FFS Very quick whistle from the ref there no thought for an advantage, also think that Almunia's keeping position meant that he heard it and stopped playing (if not then Arsenal are well rid!!) Also it is amazing how different the picture you create from the radio commentary and what actually happens differs, having watched the highlights on the Saints Player and remembering the key points in commentary, it made the Baldock chance seem like a one on one and the De Ridder half chance lob seem like a sure thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Yep couldn't understand it reckon the ref had a £100 on a 1-0 result.... I think people are being very unfair. The ref had to make a split second decision - I don't think he saw De Ridder as the West Ham defender was blocking his view - and he couldn't play advantage AFTER he'd blown the whistle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 The Sky highlights are here http://www.skysports.com/football/match_video/0,26719,11065_3407844,00.html They show Chaplow shot plus the "tip over" from Davis and a few seconds more to the build up to DeRidder's goal. HOWEVER, and it is a BIG however, "DeRidder was offside" (I think not) and the HOOF ball team "deserved a point" (I think NOT) Sky are also using the 125 year anniversary badge for Saints! ffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Interesting to see Danny Fox and a WHU player refusing to shake hands at the end...What was that all about ?? I was going to ask the same thing. Foubert wasn't it? Look forward to that battle in the return leg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 I think people are being very unfair. The ref had to make a split second decision - I don't think he saw De Ridder as the West Ham defender was blocking his view - and he couldn't play advantage AFTER he'd blown the whistle. I think I'm missing something here. Everyone, apart from De Ridder stopped as soon as that challenge went in on Harding and the ref blew straight away, way before De Ridder had shot. That was clear to me in the Northam that the game was being brought back and their defender didn't got to close it down. Not sure why people are classing this in anyway as a "disallowed goal". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corsacar saint Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 I thought this,when I saw the highlights last night. The person who edited the highlights was either a West Ham fan,or was watching an entirely different game,to those of us who were there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jam Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Bloody annoying though was doing my nut at the time. I can imagine. I was listening to FiveLive. Claridge + the other guy were laughing at the ineptitude. Incidently, Claridge was so pro-saints on the broadcast that you'd have thought that he worked for us... I think people are being very unfair. The ref had to make a split second decision - I don't think he saw De Ridder as the West Ham defender was blocking his view - and he couldn't play advantage AFTER he'd blown the whistle. Not unfair at all, if in doubt he can take a second and look to signal advantage while he makes his mind up. There's no rule that says ref decisions have to be instant. In a situation like that play isn't going to go on for long without a stoppage so the ref can book the offender then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 The "goal" was right in front of me and the ref did make a cock up. However, the whistle clearly blew and Almunia seemed to only make a half hearted effort once he heard it. SDR may still have finished, and the ref should have seen if he did and pulled it back if not, but I think Almunia would have made the finish harder if he hadn't heard the whistle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Not unfair at all, if in doubt he can take a second and look to signal advantage while he makes his mind up. There's no rule that says ref decisions have to be instant. In a situation like that play isn't going to go on for long without a stoppage so the ref can book the offender then. He didn't have to make his mind up. He knew it was a foul. The reason he gave the free-kick straight away is because it looked like the ball was going straight through. It was only because he blew the whistle that the WHU defender slowed down allowing De Ridder to get to the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chin Strain Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Yep couldn't understand it reckon the ref had a £100 on a 1-0 result.... To be fair if it had been allowed it would have cot us £87 too! First and last goal for Jos! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Full 90 up on the Player now as well, think there's even a 14 day free trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1976_Child Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 who gives a smelly lump of turd whether the BBC showed more of them in the highlights. The only thing what matters is the score. And it was one goal to us, none for them. End of. Blue line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stockbridge_saint Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 How the HELL was de Ridder offside? that's got to be one the most shocking decisions I've ever seen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Appy Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 How the HELL was de Ridder offside? that's got to be one the most shocking decisions I've ever seen Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 How the HELL was de Ridder offside? that's got to be one the most shocking decisions I've ever seen Wasn't offside, the ref had already blown, up for something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1976_Child Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Wasn't offside, the ref had already blown, up for something else. yeah and then awarded us a kick to be taken freely. Why didnae he just allow play on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 yeah and then awarded us a kick to be taken freely. Why didnae he just allow play on. Cos he cocked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stockbridge_saint Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 oh ok, that makes a lot more sense. I was just going on what was said in the highlights... I didn't follow the game that night as I was busy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Third Coming Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 why do the BBC always start their reports from Britannia Road? This is so lazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Hello all. I was logging the footage that night and I must say I logged 90% Saints stuff. The last 10 - 15 minutes we were properly hanging on though. I left before the editor got to work at the BBC South studio, maybe I should have stayed and supervised! why do the BBC always start their reports from Britannia Road? This is so lazy. It's actually an obligation to do an establishing shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 I think I'm missing something here. Everyone, apart from De Ridder stopped as soon as that challenge went in on Harding and the ref blew straight away, way before De Ridder had shot. That was clear to me in the Northam that the game was being brought back and their defender didn't got to close it down. Not sure why people are classing this in anyway as a "disallowed goal". This. Everybody stopped except De Ridder and the goalie made a half hearted attempt to save like on auto pilot but everybody else had stopped and some had already surrounded the ref. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 He didn't have to make his mind up. He knew it was a foul. The reason he gave the free-kick straight away is because it looked like the ball was going straight through. It was only because he blew the whistle that the WHU defender slowed down allowing De Ridder to get to the ball. It was obvious de Ridder was playing a wall-pass with Harding. It was terrible refereeing. Still, everyone makes mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mozz Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 It's actually an obligation to do an establishing shot It is always Itchen external or ticket office though. Suppose theres not an awful lot more to show! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 Who cares if they show a bias against us? If we carry on as we are they are going to look increasingly stupid. It was fair enough to call us struggling or lowly Southampton when we were in the Premiership, because mostly we were. But at the same time, so were West Ham. But West Ham were last year's Premiership side in second place, whereas the season before we were in the third division. I'm sure that they might have anticipated WH giving us a thrashing, but despite the number of chances of WH's they showed, it was us who gave them a lesson in how to play football properly. If we continue in this vein, there will come a time when this is recognised and we and NA are given due credit. Well said that man, but tbh I dont care what the BBC or anyone else thinks of us and the way we're playing. We're the ones watching it and loving it, I'm looking forward to seeing the extended highlights or full game again on saints player. ps Allardyce out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry the Badger Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 On Saintsplayer highlights did anybody else notice that when Kelvin nearly spills it at the end, Fox sort of puts his hand on the ball as he talks to Davis. Imagine if the ref had spotted that and given a pen, all hell would've broken loose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Third Coming Posted 20 October, 2011 Share Posted 20 October, 2011 It is always Itchen external or ticket office though. Suppose theres not an awful lot more to show! Er what about Ocean Village, the Solent, the city walls, the town centre... anything but the same bloody frontage of SMS shot from the same lazy position with the same faded zoom... Even a shot up Ted Bates legs would be a bit different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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