Saints v Palace Match Thread and Reactions

[Kingsbridge Saint]

Lemina certainly makes a big difference, takes the pressure off Romeu, think the longer those two play together the better they will become as a partnership: always said that you can see Romeus education in football, but seems to have been playing right on the edge recently due to the way we're set up and the personnel on the pitch.

 

Todays game highlighted the wastefulness in ball retention of both Tadic (yes he actually had a shot that Davis benefitted from the keeper parry) and in particular Redmond!!! Yes Redmond fizzed in a couple of shots, but the dithering needless second touch on two occasions one to make Long offside when one touch would have seen Long with just the keeper to beat, the other when Lemina pinged one over to him dithered in the box and was closed down. But both of them guilty of woeful ball retention, it's like playing with 9 men at times they concede the ball so cheaply. Said before that Redmond has no anticipation just reaction 10 yards away from he should be reacting, Tadic for all his look at me greatness, also lacks anticipation the amount of times he easily beaten to winning the ball is pretty poor, he is another one with reaction rather than anticipation, only he is reacting 5 yards away from where he should be, by comparison to Redmond.

 

Once again Mr Reliable Steven Davis was a busy Bee all over the pitch, the complete opposite to the Redmond and Tadic show, just reading the game breaking stuff up even when he was beaten. Read on the BBC that he ran further than anyone else on the pitch at 12 kilometres. Great to celebrate his 200th appearance with what turned out to be the winning goal, especially against Hodgson, who cast Steven out at Fulham as surplus to requirements. He has to be the best £750,000 Saints have ever spent.

 

Finally what have Saints and Shane Long done to upset referee Bobby Madley? Chelsea season before last books Mane for simulation when he was fouled, Last season at Arsenal ignores that Shane Long is fouled by the corner flag at the Arsenal end, ignores Kolchelny (?) is offside interfering with play in the 6 yard box laying injured and gives a penalty that has Giroud turning round to Fonte asking "who gave that away?". Then today books Long for him asking about the umpteenth foul committed against him not given......... then adds 5 minutes of injury time and plays 6. We must have submitted a $hïtTŷ report on him once.

 

Great post - pretty much nails all the points I would have made. Tadic and Redmond concede possession so often it's getting ridiculous. Lemina had a blinder today. Good to win the first 6 pointer of the season.

[Chap in the Chapel]

Don't argue too much about a totally deserved win. There are so many positives to be drawn from today's win it's extraordinary. Our manager dared to change his personnel and get a win - exactly what he was hired for. Lemina set down a marker for his role, which was exemplary. We didn't concede - an improvement. Van Dijk came back - a positive. All good. Let's take in forward to tough opposition and see what happens.

[Shance]

Sorry I haven't given my thoughts, been busy w*nking over Lemina

 

Seriously though, I said after his last game that he showed flashes of what he was about and that he could become a good player for us. In that game he gave the ball away a bit (to which the mongs on here were slating him for) but he was settling. He was brilliant against Palace. We are finally seeing a player that can fill the void left by Schniederlin. A proper energetic box to box player that can throw in a tackle and hold off a player. How much more balanced did our midfield look as opposed to the Watford game! Hope he continues to play like that, as he takes so much pressure off of Romeu.

 

The front unit was still a bit frustrating apart from Long. I'll tell you what, if that boy could finish then in this day and age he'd be a £40 million pound player. He offers everything else and had a good game.

 

Defense looked ok, couple of dodgy moments but on the whole it was solid. Hoedt had a good game and how good is his left foot? Some of his play switching passes were sublime!

 

Big test against Utd next weekend. Think there'll be too good for us but we will hopefully have Van Dijk and Hoedt marking Lukaku. Imagine Yoshida and Stephens against him. Haha

Edited 17 September, 2017 by Shance

[East Kent Saint]

2nd on MotD ! must have been the woy factor . Good game even after watching City ! The team should watch the City match to see how to attack at pace and make quick decisions . We looked so much better than last week , Lemina highlighted for being all over the pitch protecting the defence and helping the attack as well as being strong in midfield and Bertie played well on these highlights , did VDD get a touch after he came on ?

BTW how did Walker not get a red card ? Ref gave City the benefit of doubt , perhaps the speed of movement of players and ball didn't give him time to think/act.

[doddisalegend]

Just watched the extended highlights on the O/s my take is we were fortunate to be playing a team even more lacking in front of goal than us arguably Palace had the best goal scoring opportunities of the game and we rode our luck at times. We still lack any sort of goal threat I don't think Long had one meaningful attempt on goal. The midfield was much improved over last week Lemina, Romeu and Davis is probably our best central midfield set up. Forster showed his best asset as a keeper yesterday, close range shots were he can make that big frame of his count are where he does his best work, we just need the defence to stop the opposition taking any long range shots at him. Overall a big improvement on Watford but still a lot of work to be done especially on our attacking threat.

[qwertyell]

Just watched the extended highlights on the O/s my take is we were fortunate to be playing a team even more lacking in front of goal than us arguably Palace had the best goal scoring opportunities of the game and we rode our luck at times. We still lack any sort of goal threat I don't think Long had one meaningful attempt on goal. The midfield was much improved over last week Lemina, Romeu and Davis is probably our best central midfield set up. Forster showed his best asset as a keeper yesterday, close range shots were he can make that big frame of his count are where he does his best work, we just need the defence to stop the opposition taking any long range shots at him. Overall a big improvement on Watford but still a lot of work to be done especially on our attacking threat.

 

I think that's a fair summary - we were much better than against Watford, but there was little about the performance to reassure that we're turning things around.

 

We were playing the worst team in the league, who haven't scored a single goal, dominated possession, and STILL looked less threatening than them. The fact is, on clear chances created, Palace should've won 2-1. Forster pulled out two excellent stops to earn us a much needed result.

 

The defence was solid, well shielded by Lemina, who had a great game, and Romeu, who still isn't playing anything like as well as he did last season. Davis did his thing, and generally we were comfortable in the middle of the park, save for about 10 minutes at the start of the second half when Palace upped the intensity and pressed enthusiastically and we - as usual - went into a bit of a flap.

 

But there were no encouraging signs of progress in attack. Long buzzed around - although I didn't feel like he pressed anywhere near as much as usual - and provided zero goal threat. Tadic did well in the build up to Davis' goal, but that was his one positive contribution all afternoon. And Redmond was absolutely dreadful.

 

We had so many chances to counter attack - particularly in the second half as Palace pushed for an equaliser - but were consistently scuppered by Redmond's cowardice, his refusal to take responsibility and attack the wide open spaces in front of him when he could slow down, stop, turn back and pass the ball safely to someone else while he slunk off to hide again like the useless chicken crap he is.

 

I mean, what is the point in him if he's not prepared to run with the ball? He wasn't up against Paulo Maldini - Joel Ward is about as limited a full back as he'll face in the Premier League. Yet he didn't test him once. He didn't do anything aside from ineptly fall over whilst trying to pass backwards instead of driving forwards, yielding the possession that led to Benteke's great chance.

 

We picked Long, presumably for his pace on the counter attack, yet failed to have any counter attacks of note. It was as if everyone immediately lost confidence the second they crossed the halfway line and instead settled for ball retention over trying to score. Perhaps that came from the manager's tactical instructions, in which case we might as well have kept Puel.

 

Anyhow, a win's a win, and beating a team who might turn out to be rival over the course of the season if we don't get our act together is no bad thing. Lemina, Hoedt and Forster did really well.

 

I just don't see how we're going to start scoring again. There's nothing there, no hints of improvement to feel optimistic about, no impression that the manager has a cunning plan up his sleeve that just needs fine tuning - the poor St Mary's punters aren't going to get a whole lot to cheer about anytime soon, in my opinion.

[doddisalegend]

I think that's a fair summary - we were much better than against Watford, but there was little about the performance to reassure that we're turning things around.

 

We were playing the worst team in the league, who haven't scored a single goal, dominated possession, and STILL looked less threatening than them. The fact is, on clear chances created, Palace should've won 2-1. Forster pulled out two excellent stops to earn us a much needed result.

 

The defence was solid, well shielded by Lemina, who had a great game, and Romeu, who still isn't playing anything like as well as he did last season. Davis did his thing, and generally we were comfortable in the middle of the park, save for about 10 minutes at the start of the second half when Palace upped the intensity and pressed enthusiastically and we - as usual - went into a bit of a flap.

 

But there were no encouraging signs of progress in attack. Long buzzed around - although I didn't feel like he pressed anywhere near as much as usual - and provided zero goal threat. Tadic did well in the build up to Davis' goal, but that was his one positive contribution all afternoon. And Redmond was absolutely dreadful.

 

We had so many chances to counter attack - particularly in the second half as Palace pushed for an equaliser - but were consistently scuppered by Redmond's cowardice, his refusal to take responsibility and attack the wide open spaces in front of him when he could slow down, stop, turn back and pass the ball safely to someone else while he slunk off to hide again like the useless chicken crap he is.

 

I mean, what is the point in him if he's not prepared to run with the ball? He wasn't up against Paulo Maldini - Joel Ward is about as limited a full back as he'll face in the Premier League. Yet he didn't test him once. He didn't do anything aside from ineptly fall over whilst trying to pass backwards instead of driving forwards, yielding the possession that led to Benteke's great chance.

We picked Long, presumably for his pace on the counter attack, yet failed to have any counter attacks of note. It was as if everyone immediately lost confidence the second they crossed the halfway line and instead settled for ball retention over trying to score. Perhaps that came from the manager's tactical instructions, in which case we might as well have kept Puel.

 

Anyhow, a win's a win, and beating a team who might turn out to be rival over the course of the season if we don't get our act together is no bad thing. Lemina, Hoedt and Forster did really well.

 

I just don't see how we're going to start scoring again. There's nothing there, no hints of improvement to feel optimistic about, no impression that the manager has a cunning plan up his sleeve that just needs fine tuning - the poor St Mary's punters aren't going to get a whole lot to cheer about anytime soon, in my opinion.

 

I remember an interview Redmond did with Solent last season when he mentioned that Puel had wanted him to run at the opposition more and try and get into the box and for a few games last season, in and around the cup final, he did that but now he seems to regressed to playing it safe again. While he isn't a unit he is relatively quick with good feet all I want is for him to get the ball and drive at opposition defenders he will lose the ball sometimes but it would be preferable to safe back passing.

[Andy Durman]

Whilst it's pleasing to get 3 points and a win, let's not forget that Crystal Palace missed 2 fantastic chances, which better teams would have buried. Yes we dominated possession, but how many good chances did we create?

 

I like what I see in Lemina and Hoedt but for me our lack of cutting edge and killer pass greatly concerns.

 

Redmond plays every minute, but is a poor decision maker.

[John B]

I remember an interview Redmond did with Solent last season when he mentioned that Puel had wanted him to run at the opposition more and try and get into the box and for a few games last season, in and around the cup final, he did that but now he seems to regressed to playing it safe again. While he isn't a unit he is relatively quick with good feet all I want is for him to get the ball and drive at opposition defenders he will lose the ball sometimes but it would be preferable to safe back passing.

 

Redmond has a pass rate of 80% this season with 65% forward

[John Boy Saint]

Redmond has a pass rate of 80% this season with 65% forward

But the majority of those passes are short little interplays with Bertrand where he is faced with a nasty bigger boy and he doesn't fancy it and he off loads the ball back to Betrand. During the first half the camera cut to Ryan after just such a moment and in amongst his standard facial expression of a bulldog chewing a wasp, there was also a look of I ain't passing the ball to you 'cos it's probably coming back at me with the wrong coloured shirt controlling it. 2nd half you hardly heard Redmonds name and the bulk of our attacking play was coming down our right.

[Wurzel]

I think that's a fair summary - we were much better than against Watford, but there was little about the performance to reassure that we're turning things around.

 

We were playing the worst team in the league, who haven't scored a single goal, dominated possession, and STILL looked less threatening than them. The fact is, on clear chances created, Palace should've won 2-1. Forster pulled out two excellent stops to earn us a much needed result.

 

The defence was solid, well shielded by Lemina, who had a great game, and Romeu, who still isn't playing anything like as well as he did last season. Davis did his thing, and generally we were comfortable in the middle of the park, save for about 10 minutes at the start of the second half when Palace upped the intensity and pressed enthusiastically and we - as usual - went into a bit of a flap.

 

But there were no encouraging signs of progress in attack. Long buzzed around - although I didn't feel like he pressed anywhere near as much as usual - and provided zero goal threat. Tadic did well in the build up to Davis' goal, but that was his one positive contribution all afternoon. And Redmond was absolutely dreadful.

 

We had so many chances to counter attack - particularly in the second half as Palace pushed for an equaliser - but were consistently scuppered by Redmond's cowardice, his refusal to take responsibility and attack the wide open spaces in front of him when he could slow down, stop, turn back and pass the ball safely to someone else while he slunk off to hide again like the useless chicken crap he is.

 

I mean, what is the point in him if he's not prepared to run with the ball? He wasn't up against Paulo Maldini - Joel Ward is about as limited a full back as he'll face in the Premier League. Yet he didn't test him once. He didn't do anything aside from ineptly fall over whilst trying to pass backwards instead of driving forwards, yielding the possession that led to Benteke's great chance.

 

We picked Long, presumably for his pace on the counter attack, yet failed to have any counter attacks of note. It was as if everyone immediately lost confidence the second they crossed the halfway line and instead settled for ball retention over trying to score. Perhaps that came from the manager's tactical instructions, in which case we might as well have kept Puel.

 

Anyhow, a win's a win, and beating a team who might turn out to be rival over the course of the season if we don't get our act together is no bad thing. Lemina, Hoedt and Forster did really well.

 

I just don't see how we're going to start scoring again. There's nothing there, no hints of improvement to feel optimistic about, no impression that the manager has a cunning plan up his sleeve that just needs fine tuning - the poor St Mary's punters aren't going to get a whole lot to cheer about anytime soon, in my opinion.

 

 

I've been racking my brain trying to think of how to sum up Redmond in a single word and you've hit the nail on the read there with cowardice. Far too often he takes the easy (and usually wrong) option with his passes, his runs off the ball and once he has it his decisions when to run and not to run with it. Coupled with that his ongoing refusal to take responsibility, seemingly always looking to blame others when it goes wrong.

 

Yesterday was a great team performance but he was the stand out individual where there was still "room for improvement".

 

Seeing us ending with 3CBs on the pitch has me wondering if that is MPs plan for the future. Bertrand and Cedric bombing up and down the wings at will, defending when necessary with Romeu and Lemina sat in front of the back 3 looks a solid unit defensively. It would need some adjustments up front, Redmond for me would be the one to sacrifice if he wants to experiment with that.

[tajjuk]

Palace had two good chances yes, but should we not credit our goalkeeper for two excellent saves? Those were top drawer IMO and overall play aside those Forster looked more like his old self.

 

Also one of those chances only came about because Redmond slipped over and gave the ball away in a dangerous area. Palace barely created anything and I think huge credit must be given to our manager for the way he had Bentek shackled and basically neutered Palace's only attack. Hoedt was the obvious one to mark Benteke but Yoshida stuck to him like glue and Romeu was obviously instructed to get close as well to hoover up any knock downs.

 

What people above say about Redmond is spot on. Tadic too but he was better than he has been, but his lack of pace is glaring at times, there was a chance for a counter attack in the second half where he had the whole half to run into and basically was easily reeled in by the defenders and he had to cut back and the chance of a break was gone.

 

We desperately need an upgrade on these two, it's a great shame Sims is injured because he energy and willingness to take people on would bring something to this team. I hope the black box is working hard to find another Mane out there because that is what we need, Mane mk. 2. Redmond has his pace and movement without the goal threat or technical ability, Tadic has the technical ability but not the pace and movement.

[mrfahaji]

Palace had two good chances yes, but should we not credit our goalkeeper for two excellent saves? Those were top drawer IMO and overall play aside those Forster looked more like his old self.

 

They were great saves, but also saves we are used to seeing him make - i.e. he makes himself big from close range and the ball hits him. The frustration most people have with him is how slow he is to move and get down to shots from distance. Palace looked to have picked up on that, Loftus-Cheek in particular placing shots from range along the ground in the corners. Fortunately they were slightly off target.

 

So even though Forster definitely deserves credit for some crucial stops, I'm not sure how much evidence there was of 'being back to his old self' (not that his old self ever included being good at saving shots from distance).

[Saint86]

Lemina certainly makes a big difference, takes the pressure off Romeu, think the longer those two play together the better they will become as a partnership: always said that you can see Romeus education in football, but seems to have been playing right on the edge recently due to the way we're set up and the personnel on the pitch.

 

Todays game highlighted the wastefulness in ball retention of both Tadic (yes he actually had a shot that Davis benefitted from the keeper parry) and in particular Redmond!!! Yes Redmond fizzed in a couple of shots, but the dithering needless second touch on two occasions one to make Long offside when one touch would have seen Long with just the keeper to beat, the other when Lemina pinged one over to him dithered in the box and was closed down. But both of them guilty of woeful ball retention, it's like playing with 9 men at times they concede the ball so cheaply. Said before that Redmond has no anticipation just reaction 10 yards away from he should be reacting, Tadic for all his look at me greatness, also lacks anticipation the amount of times he easily beaten to winning the ball is pretty poor, he is another one with reaction rather than anticipation, only he is reacting 5 yards away from where he should be, by comparison to Redmond.

 

Once again Mr Reliable Steven Davis was a busy Bee all over the pitch, the complete opposite to the Redmond and Tadic show, just reading the game breaking stuff up even when he was beaten. Read on the BBC that he ran further than anyone else on the pitch at 12 kilometres. Great to celebrate his 200th appearance with what turned out to be the winning goal, especially against Hodgson, who cast Steven out at Fulham as surplus to requirements. He has to be the best £750,000 Saints have ever spent.

 

Finally what have Saints and Shane Long done to upset referee Bobby Madley? Chelsea season before last books Mane for simulation when he was fouled, Last season at Arsenal ignores that Shane Long is fouled by the corner flag at the Arsenal end, ignores Kolchelny (?) is offside interfering with play in the 6 yard box laying injured and gives a penalty that has Giroud turning round to Fonte asking "who gave that away?". Then today books Long for him asking about the umpteenth foul committed against him not given......... then adds 5 minutes of injury time and plays 6. We must have submitted a $hïtTŷ report on him once.

 

Really good summary mate. And interesting analysis of the ref. I didn't realise he was responsible for all that!

[Dark Munster]

Sorry I haven't given my thoughts, been busy w*nking over Lemina

 

Seriously though, I said after his last game that he showed flashes of what he was about and that he could become a good player for us. In that game he gave the ball away a bit (to which the mongs on here were slating him for) but he was settling. He was brilliant against Palace. We are finally seeing a player that can fill the void left by Schniederlin. A proper energetic box to box player that can throw in a tackle and hold off a player. How much more balanced did our midfield look as opposed to the Watford game! Hope he continues to play like that, as he takes so much pressure off of Romeu.

 

The front unit was still a bit frustrating apart from Long. I'll tell you what, if that boy could finish then in this day and age he'd be a £40 million pound player. He offers everything else and had a good game.

 

Defense looked ok, couple of dodgy moments but on the whole it was solid. Hoedt had a good game and how good is his left foot? Some of his play switching passes were sublime!

 

Big test against Utd next weekend. Think there'll be too good for us but we will hopefully have Van Dijk and Hoedt marking Lukaku. Imagine Yoshida and Stephens against him. Haha

How about playing all four?

[tajjuk]

They were great saves, but also saves we are used to seeing him make - i.e. he makes himself big from close range and the ball hits him. The frustration most people have with him is how slow he is to move and get down to shots from distance. Palace looked to have picked up on that, Loftus-Cheek in particular placing shots from range along the ground in the corners. Fortunately they were slightly off target.

 

So even though Forster definitely deserves credit for some crucial stops, I'm not sure how much evidence there was of 'being back to his old self' (not that his old self ever included being good at saving shots from distance).

 

He had both of those shots covered if you notice, the better one, the low drive from Loftus-Cheek that fizzed wide he would have saved easily as he got right across to it.

 

Also the Benteke one was making himself big yes, the save from Puncheon though was great anticipation, he was already moving and diving before he had shot. And by old self I meant looking a bit more mobile and being more commanding than he has been.

 

At the end of the day it's Forster making saves and earning us points, I don't really care how he does it, hopefully that will give him more confidence and he'll start getting some more clean sheets.

[wild-saint]

How about playing all four?

 

Actually I think he will play 3 CBs next week.

[mrfahaji]

Really good summary mate. And interesting analysis of the ref. I didn't realise he was responsible for all that!

 

The only thing I'd say about the ref criticism is that we deliberately waited until the injury time board had been put up before making our sub, presumably because it's a more effective way of eating into the time - I think the ref has to add a mandatory 30 seconds for a substitution in normal time? - and therefore if it was 'minimum of 5' plus a substitution, I certainly expected it to last a bit longer in reality.

[John Boy Saint]

The only thing I'd say about the ref criticism is that we deliberately waited until the injury time board had been put up before making our sub, presumably because it's a more effective way of eating into the time - I think the ref has to add a mandatory 30 seconds for a substitution in normal time? - and therefore if it was 'minimum of 5' plus a substitution, I certainly expected it to last a bit longer in reality.

Really!!!???? You can have open heart surgery carried out on the pitch and the buggers still only play the default 4 minutes added time. 5 was a joke to start with no one had 'died' on the pitch at the point the board with 5 on went up with only 5 subs being made........ yes we mucked about running the clock down 2nd half but you very rarely see the ref actually apply the actually time spent buggering about.

If he was going to be so pedantic, and based on a recent newspaper report, then he should have added 15 minutes to each half to make up for the time the ball was dead or out of play.

[mrfahaji]

Really!!!???? You can have open heart surgery carried out on the pitch and the buggers still only play the default 4 minutes added time. 5 was a joke to start with no one had 'died' on the pitch at the point the board with 5 on went up with only 5 subs being made........ yes we mucked about running the clock down 2nd half but you very rarely see the ref actually apply the actually time spent buggering about.

If he was going to be so pedantic, and based on a recent newspaper report, then he should have added 15 minutes to each half to make up for the time the ball was dead or out of play.

 

I wasn't defending the initial 5 minutes, just that he played an extra minute because we made a substitution in injury time once the 5 mins had been shown.

[Lighthouse]

The obvious solution to all of this is to change the rules to a certain amount of 'in play' time, perhaps 40 minutes, like in rugby. If the clocked stopped every time we had an injury or substitution, there wouldn't be this pointless contention at the end of the game.

[mrfahaji]

The obvious solution to all of this is to change the rules to a certain amount of 'in play' time, perhaps 40 minutes, like in rugby. If the clocked stopped every time we had an injury or substitution, there wouldn't be this pointless contention at the end of the game.

 

I was about to say how I'd agree with that, but as I was typing I was thinking of different scenarios and now I'm not sure! If only stopping the clock for injuries and substitutions, surely it should be 45 minutes as the ref is meant to stop his watch for those incidents anyway. But if that were the case, there'd be an incentive to time waste because the ref couldn't add anything on at his discretion. But then, if the clock stopped for EVERY time the ball went out of play, games with 40 min 'play' time would last hours. A happy medium would be something where the actual clock mimics what the ref would typically add time for (i.e. obvious time wasting) but then who decides what counts and what doesn't? The ref?

[Lighthouse]

I was about to say how I'd agree with that, but as I was typing I was thinking of different scenarios and now I'm not sure! If only stopping the clock for injuries and substitutions, surely it should be 45 minutes as the ref is meant to stop his watch for those incidents anyway. But if that were the case, there'd be an incentive to time waste because the ref couldn't add anything on at his discretion. But then, if the clock stopped for EVERY time the ball went out of play, games with 40 min 'play' time would last hours. A happy medium would be something where the actual clock mimics what the ref would typically add time for (i.e. obvious time wasting) but then who decides what counts and what doesn't? The ref?

 

I did mean every time the ball goes out of play, which would stop keepers taking half an hour to take a goal kick, etc.

 

Maybe not 40 minutes, perhaps 30 or 35. I've never actually timed the in play time of a match but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to work out a rough average and go from there.

[Saint-Fred]

I did mean every time the ball goes out of play, which would stop keepers taking half an hour to take a goal kick, etc.

 

Maybe not 40 minutes, perhaps 30 or 35. I've never actually timed the in play time of a match but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to work out a rough average and go from there.

 

Isn't that one of the proposals to take football forward currently being considered? 30 minutes each half of actual in play time.http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40311889

[Ohio Saint]

Is that a record poll win on this forum for lemina? It certainly looks like one!

[krissyboy31]

I did mean every time the ball goes out of play, which would stop keepers taking half an hour to take a goal kick, etc.

 

Maybe not 40 minutes, perhaps 30 or 35. I've never actually timed the in play time of a match but I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to work out a rough average and go from there.

 

It would be interesting. I know it's more stop/start but they do it in Rugby and sometimes a 40 minute half can last close to an hour.

[Charlie Wayman]

Isn't that one of the proposals to take football forward currently being considered? 30 minutes each half of actual in play time.http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40311889

 

It is, you are dead right. In political terms it probably amounts to a 'green paper' from FIFA out for consultation and comment so it looks like something akin to this could happen one day. In my view there is nothing wrong with the current format, it ain't broke so no need to fix it. You win some, you lose some. I'd feel cheated if the ref blew for time at say 65 minutes because there had been no stoppages of any consequence during a particular match.

[Lighthouse]

It is, you are dead right. In political terms it probably amounts to a 'green paper' from FIFA out for consultation and comment so it looks like something akin to this could happen one day. In my view there is nothing wrong with the current format, it ain't broke so no need to fix it. You win some, you lose some. I'd feel cheated if the ref blew for time at say 65 minutes because there had been no stoppages of any consequence during a particular match.

 

There would still be stoppages, every time the ball goes out of play. The overall length of the game wouldn't be that much different, it would however stop things like fake injuries to waste time and players wasting an entire minute taking a throw in.

 

You'd still be walking out of St Mary's between 4.45 and 5pm, it would just cut down on a lot of the gamesmanship in the game.

[Saint-Fred]

It is, you are dead right. In political terms it probably amounts to a 'green paper' from FIFA out for consultation and comment so it looks like something akin to this could happen one day. In my view there is nothing wrong with the current format, it ain't broke so no need to fix it. You win some, you lose some. I'd feel cheated if the ref blew for time at say 65 minutes because there had been no stoppages of any consequence during a particular match.

 

I do wonder sometimes about how far they are taking the game away from the grass roots...there is no way at a local level they could police a 30 minutes in play rule accurately, let alone goal line technology, video refs, goal line linesmen etc... The game played on a Sunday morning at some point in the future is likely not even to resemble the professional game..

[Lets B Avenue]

I do wonder sometimes about how far they are taking the game away from the grass roots...there is no way at a local level they could police a 30 minutes in play rule accurately, let alone goal line technology, video refs, goal line linesmen etc... The game played on a Sunday morning at some point in the future is likely not even to resemble the professional game..

 

Whyever not? The ref has a stopwatch. All he has to do is stop it when the ball is out of play. Those of us who played at Mayfield Park in Weston Lane, will remember having to traipse miles down the slope to retrieve the ball and then finding out the ref had blown exactly on 90 mins.

[Saint-Fred]

Whyever not? The ref has a stopwatch. All he has to do is stop it when the ball is out of play. Those of us who played at Mayfield Park in Weston Lane, will remember having to traipse miles down the slope to retrieve the ball and then finding out the ref had blown exactly on 90 mins.

 

If it's that simple..why do premier league officials struggle to get the timing right now despite having a team of officials, headsets, 2 watches and an independent time keeper?

Perhaps to keep the game real they should only let modern stadiums have three stands and the fourth side must be covered in nettles with a ditch. There would be no ball boys on that side...lets see Mane and aguero wading through that to get the ball back!

[benjii]

I'd like to see an automatic yellow card for anyone who touches the ball after the whistle has gone and it's the other team's dead ball.

 

Why does football tolerate people picking up the ball, running ten or twenty yards away then slowly throwing it back or dripping it? It's pure cheating and easy to avoid and stamp out. If you did that in a rugby or hockey match you'd get carded. And fake injuries are easily dealt with by just playing on and allowing treatment on the pitch - there could be an exception for injuries in the goal mouth and anyone receiving treatment is ignored for offside purposes. For any deadball, introduce a rule where you have ten seconds from the referee's whistle to take it or it's reversed.

 

These things would all be quite easy to implement and would clear up a lot of ****.

[Saint-Fred]

I'd like to see an automatic yellow card for anyone who touches the ball after the whistle has gone and it's the other team's dead ball.

 

Why does football tolerate people picking up the ball, running ten or twenty yards away then slowly throwing it back or dripping it? It's pure cheating and easy to avoid and stamp out. If you did that in a rugby or hockey match you'd get carded. And fake injuries are easily dealt with by just playing on and allowing treatment on the pitch - there could be an exception for injuries in the goal mouth and anyone receiving treatment is ignored for offside purposes. For any deadball, introduce a rule where you have ten seconds from the referee's whistle to take it or it's reversed.

 

These things would all be quite easy to implement and would clear up a lot of ****.

 

The 6 second rule for keepers was never really implemented for any length of time so we have no hope for a 10 second rule to take a kick or throw in.

I think the game needs less rules rather than more.. Imagine reversing a free kick because a team took too long..you'd then have a twenty to thirty second delay whilst the teams set up the other way (eg everyone had gone into one box for a kick and then had to head back to their own half of the pitch as the kick was reversed)..it would be chaos!

[Lets B Avenue]

If it's that simple..why do premier league officials struggle to get the timing right now despite having a team of officials, headsets, 2 watches and an independent time keeper?

 

Who is this Independant time keeper that you talk of?

[captainchris]

I think that more people post when Saints lose because they really care about the team. They are very upset and so give their

ideas about what they think went wrong and how matters should be improved.

However when Saints win everything is great in their world and so they don't feel the same compulsion to post using the theory

of "if it ain't broke don't fix it".

 

.

 

Well I don't think everyone thinks 'everything is great' just relieved to at least get a win yes.....

There was a slight improvement but not huge let's face it and Palace could easily have knocked in a couple lets be honest.....

Let's see how this next one goes .....

[Saint-Fred]

Who is this Independant time keeper that you talk of?

 

It's part of the fourth official and one of the linesmans responsibilities as I understand it. The final decision is with the ref but the fourth official notes down any stoppages. As I understand it the ref doesn't stop his watch so I assume the fourth official keeps tabs of the total the ref tells him then that contributes to the final time added on..I assume the ref doesn't try to remember them all!

Edited 20 September, 2017 by Saint-Fred

[The9]

Palace had two good chances yes, but should we not credit our goalkeeper for two excellent saves? Those were top drawer IMO and overall play aside those Forster looked more like his old self.

 

Forster has always been great at saving stuff straight at his body from relatively close range. It's the stuff where he has to move he has trouble with, and he probably wasn't getting to the shot that whistled low past his right hand post had it been on target, which suggested no change on that front. From the eye test I'd expect that his save stats are far more heavily impacted by how near him the shot is to begin with than any other Premier League keeper.

[The9]

I'd like to see an automatic yellow card for anyone who touches the ball after the whistle has gone and it's the other team's dead ball.

 

Why does football tolerate people picking up the ball, running ten or twenty yards away then slowly throwing it back or dripping it?

 

It's already a yellow card, like numerous other things that used to be but somehow aren't now just because refs don't bother implementing them.

[The9]

He had both of those shots covered if you notice, the better one, the low drive from Loftus-Cheek that fizzed wide he would have saved easily as he got right across to it.

 

Funny that, I thought he wasn't getting to it.