Jump to content

Saints 8 (Eight) Sunderland 0 - Match and Reactions

Unbelievable Jeff

By Unbelievable Jeff
in The Saints

 Share

MotM vs Sunderland (Home 2014/15)  

520 members have voted

  1. 1. MotM vs Sunderland (Home 2014/15)

    • Forster
      2
    • Bertrand
      2
    • Clyne
      23
    • Alderweireld
      1
    • Fonte
      1
    • Schneiderlin
      30
    • Davis, S
      21
    • Cork
      11
    • Long
      6
    • Tadic
      371
    • Pelle
      46
    • Mane
      2
    • Wanyama
      1
    • Mayuka
      3

Recommended Posts

Sour Mash

Sour Mash

Posted
Posted
It was a foul by forster. We would all be seething had a ref not given that to us

 

Exactly. Anyone with a basic understanding of football and having had the opportunity of seeing the replay would call it as a Penalty. It clearly was.

The Cat

The Cat

Posted
Posted

We were right in line with it and thought at the time that it should have been a penalty but not a sending off. Had that been the case it most probably wouldn't have made much difference to the result because they would still have been playing with the same terrible defence who had no clue how to deal with our attack.

Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
As was the foul on Long, earlier. But I'm not seething about that.

 

8-0 helps, of course.

 

Strong shouts for a handball by Sunderland when they won the ball in the build up to that penalty claim. Haven't seen a close enough replay to give a definitive view but swings and roundabouts etc. On another day it could have been a penalty or a Saints free kick on halfway.

SNSUN

SNSUN

Posted
Posted

Just watched the MOTD highlights again. (I've told the wife never to delete it from the Sky Planner.) Pearce says our last biggest win in the Premier League "was against the grey shirts of Man Utd". Is it just me that bothers?

CB Fry

CB Fry

Posted
Posted
It isn't as if Graham Poll was always correct in every decision he made and that he had an uncontroversial reputation. And it is easy for him to ruminate about the decision from the comfort of his armchair having watched slow-mo video replays. There doesn't appear to be much consideration given to what Marriner would have seen and the speed of the event in real time which determined his decision.

 

Graham Poll doesn't address the match referee in that article, he addresses Jonathan Pearce, the match commentator over his poor grasp of the laws of the game.

 

It's equally "easy to ruminate" over articles you don't seem to have actually read.

 

And secondly, you expect consideration for Mariner because of the "speed of the event in real time" but castigate Graham Poll because he wasn't "correct in every decision he made" even though though the decisions would have also been made at similarly high speed "real time" situations. Right you are then.

 

It clearly should have been a pen, we got lucky. And we would have still won anyway.

Wes Tender

Wes Tender

Posted
Posted
Graham Poll doesn't address the match referee in that article, he addresses Jonathan Pearce, the match commentator over his poor grasp of the laws of the game.

 

It's equally "easy to ruminate" over articles you don't seem to have actually read.

 

And secondly, you expect consideration for Mariner because of the "speed of the event in real time" but castigate Graham Poll because he wasn't "correct in every decision he made" even though though the decisions would have also been made at similarly high speed "real time" situations. Right you are then.

 

It clearly should have been a pen, we got lucky. And we would have still won anyway.

 

It obviously wasn't clearly a penalty. The referee had a clear view of it and decided on the basis of what he had seen. From Sunderland's point of view, it is a shame that you weren't refereeing the match, as you are almost certainly better qualified than him

Sour Mash

Sour Mash

Posted
Posted
It obviously wasn't clearly a penalty. The referee had a clear view of it and decided on the basis of what he had seen. From Sunderland's point of view, it is a shame that you weren't refereeing the match, as you are almost certainly better qualified than him
Do you honestly not think it was a penalty?
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)
Do you honestly not think it was a penalty?

My initial gut instinct was that it was a penalty but I wasn't 100% sure. Which I think is the point Wes is making. If you're not 100% sure then its not "clear cut" IMO. Semantics I guess.

 

Does a referee have to be 100% sure before giving penalty decisions or do 'the rules' give him leeway to award a penalty based on a percentage certainty?

 

It doesn't really matter how "clear cut" a penalty is upon fine tooth comb scrutiny. Its how "clear cut" it was to the referee in real time.

Edited by trousers
Sour Mash

Sour Mash

Posted
Posted
My initial gut instinct was that it was a penalty but I wasn't 100% sure. Which I think is the point Wes is making. If you're not 100% sure then its not "clear cut" IMO. Semantics I guess.

 

Does a referee have to be 100% sure before giving penalty decisions or do 'the rules' give him leeway to award a penalty based on a percentage certainty?

 

It doesn't really matter how "clear cut" a penalty is upon fine tooth comb scrutiny. Its how "clear cut" it was to the referee in real time.

The Ref made a mistake, it should have been a Pen, we got lucky on this one.
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
The Ref made a mistake

 

Back to semantics but I guess, but that depends on whether "not being 100% sure" = "a mistake".

 

Unless the referee comes out and explains why he didn't give it then we'll never know for sure whether he (a) saw clearly what happened, and thus applied the rules incorrectly, or (b) whether he couldn't see clearly what happened and therefore was duty bound to give the benefit of his doubt to the keeper. That said, if the answer is "(b)", I guess one could argue that his "mistake" was not being in the right position to have a more clear cut view of the incident.

 

Anyway....about time we got back to gloating about the 8-0 win. My grin is still as wide as it was on Saturday! :)

Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
The Ref made a mistake, it should have been a Pen, we got lucky on this one.

 

It certainly wasn't a mistake. He just had a different opinion to you. There was nothing eccentric about his decision, it was just one of those occasions where it could have gone either way. There have been far more dubious penalty awards over this weekend. In my opinion, of course.

mitch01

mitch01

Posted
Posted
The Ref made a mistake, it should have been a Pen, we got lucky on this one.

 

You hardly ever get a penalty for those. The player got his shot away before the challenge, the goalkeeper was making himself big and his momentum took him into the player when the ball was gone. It's one of those strange areas of football where the rules are not enforced to the letter. It happens all the time; a player gets a shot away and is wiped out by someone trying to make a block, but because he almost scored with the shot it isn't considered as a possible penalty. If Fletcher had a chance of getting to the ball it would have been 100% a red card and penalty, but because it was a shot referees don't allow you a 'double chance' by giving a penalty. I'd have been surprised if it had been given.

NickG

NickG

Posted
Posted
It shouldn't have gone either way

It was a penalty all day long

 

You are wrong.

Of course could have gone either way, as wasn't given by ref, nor picked up by the linesman, nor particularly surprised players.

 

It happened very close to where I sit. I had a different view on the day to the motd angle (view in both meanings).

 

I fully understand the rules, what makes a foul, and the impact of where the ball is etc.

 

From a side on, close view, pretty level with the incident my view on the day was that it wasn't a penalty. I didn't have that instant worry, looking for the ref thinking it would, or even likely to be given.

 

It seemed Forster came out assertively, forward ran in, losing control of the ball and they collided. As someone said , in realtime , from the side view, my memory was there was more of forward into Forster / 50:50. I also felt ball was racing out of play.

 

When seeing the TV angle which IMHO distorts slightly the collision, but does allow you to see ball on play still I can see a much stronger argument that a penalty could have been given.

 

Even if it was given, it would not have been a sending off. It wasn't a clear obvious goalscoring opportunity. Poll has described it as almost certainly would have scored..he would have scored so no sending off.

 

Also, I appreciate Poll's comments about ball still in play but there will be some interpretation. Of course ref thinks about where ball is, what's happening, effect of action on the play. The slow motion replay shows ball was in play, could easily have been ref felt collision after player lost control and attack was over.

 

Having seen TV I would not been surprised or moaned if was given. But fact is, as records show, it wasn't a penalty.

 

Even if given would still have stuffed them!

Sour Mash

Sour Mash

Posted
Posted
No worries dude.

 

Seems an odd decision. No one questioned it on the day.

Very odd decision. I've watched the goals a fair few times now and that didn't cross my mind once.
Lallana's Left Peg

Lallana's Left Peg

Posted
Posted

What a crock of ****. It clearly took a deflection given the spin on the ball but how can anyone say the shot wasn't going in prior to the deflection as the deflection occurred a split second after the shot was struck. Peculiar.

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)
Very odd decision. I've watched the goals a fair few times now and that didn't cross my mind once.

 

Just watched it again on the MOTD highlights (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04mm14d/match-of-the-day-20142015-18102014 ). They showed 4 or 5 different angles and it does look like the defender changed the direction of the ball on one of the angles. The keeper also dives the opposite way to the ball which I didn't notice at the time, which is a bit of a giveaway I suppose. Still harsh to deny Mane though IMO.

Edited by trousers
mickn

mickn

Posted
Posted
What a crock of ****. It clearly took a deflection given the spin on the ball but how can anyone say the shot wasn't going in prior to the deflection as the deflection occurred a split second after the shot was struck. Peculiar.

 

When I saw the replay of that goal I immediately said to my nipper that I thought it looked more like an own goal

Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
Just watched it again on the MOTD highlights (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04mm14d/match-of-the-day-20142015-18102014 ). They showed 4 or 5 different angles and it does look like the defender changed the direction of the ball on one of the angles. The keeper also dives the opposite way to the ball which I didn't notice at the time, which is a bit of a giveaway I suppose. Still harsh to deny Mane though IMO.

 

Absolutely ridiculous decision. I said earlier that Mané was aiming for the other side of the goal but there's no way that was an own goal. His shot was on target and it deflected off the defender's attempted block. Somebody needs to teach these idiots how football works. Does this now mean that every time a shot gets a nick off a defender it's going to be classed as an own goal? Pillocks.

Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted

Another example of the anti Saints agenda. Attempting to take the gloss off our win by making it seem that 3 of them were own goals. Rather than this game being played out everytime We play Sunderland like our 7-0 thumping by Leeds in the 70's this game will forever be remembered as the day Sunderland lost by 8 due to a goalkeeper not being sent off, a stonewall pen that never was and 3 own goals instead of the mauling that is was. They really do hate us dont they.

Toon Saint

Toon Saint

Posted
Posted

I thought it looked a bit odd when watching the replay on MOTD. Think he opened his body to put it in the right-hand corner and the defender has steered it in the opposite side. Shame. Hopefully he'll bang in his first vs. Stoke.

dronskisaint

dronskisaint

Posted
Posted
Another example of the anti Saints agenda. Attempting to take the gloss off our win by making it seem that 3 of them were own goals. Rather than this game being played out everytime We play Sunderland like our 7-0 thumping by Leeds in the 70's this game will forever be remembered as the day Sunderland lost by 8 due to a goalkeeper not being sent off, a stonewall pen that never was and 3 own goals instead of the mauling that is was. They really do hate us dont they.

 

Strangely the Leeds match that sticks in my mind was the 3-1 win up there where we won with 2 own goals and a penalty...I still remember it but you cannot imagine the immensity of the cluck I still don't give all these years later. Horrible team, loved it! :-)

Lets B Avenue

Lets B Avenue

Posted
Posted
Strangely the Leeds match that sticks in my mind was the 3-1 win up there where we won with 2 own goals and a penalty...I still remember it but you cannot imagine the immensity of the cluck I still don't give all these years later. Horrible team, loved it! :-)

 

And in doing so, we stopped them winning the league. Handing it to Everton, who were stuffing Chelsea at the time. The locals were less than friendly after the game when the scores came out.

Appy

Appy

Posted
Posted
shame, still, is three own goals in a game a record?

 

No Sunderland did it against Charlton at home in the early 2000s.

  • 11 months later...
Saint Garrett

Saint Garrett

Posted
Posted
So this was a year ago. What a mental game that was. The first couple of pages of this thread, "we're not really playing well."

 

I'm not even sure we were that great in this game, Sunderland were just pathetically bad.

VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted (edited)
I'm not even sure we were that great in this game, Sunderland were just pathetically bad.

 

Sunderland were well on top first half. We got some lucky breaks. 2nd half was very different. Recall Ronald being very unhappy with our first half display.

Edited by VectisSaint
  • 1 year later...
itchen

itchen

Posted
Posted
This has got 0-0 written all over it

 

As we moan on about our lack of goals, I thought I'd remind us all that we used to score them. And that Tadic overwhelmingly topped the poll.

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...