Brighton 1-2 Saints - Reaction

[SaintZamboni]

I thought we were bang average first half but stepped up well in the second. Took a lot more control of the ball, pressed well and improved.

Ings coming on gave us more movement and threat and Walcott did well on the left. Djenepo needs more time to get his all round game up to standard.

Credit to the team for continuing to work their asses off at the end. Adam’s was back in our own half pressuring and winning challenges in the 93rd minute

[SaintBobby]

I had no doubt it was a penalty and felt certain as soon as I saw the first replay that we’d get given it. Seems more marginal on a 15th viewing though.

A real problem is that it isn’t clear and obvious what clear and obvious means. 

[SaintSmitty]

56 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

We did not deserve that at all! First half in particular one to forget, 2nd half...if anything, we kept the ball a little better and were less sloppy when we did have it. Moved it a bit quicker, and sprayed it down the flanks (how you get in behind teams with 3 CB's). We were a lot more gritty as well.

For me, VAR doesn't keen need to get involved in those sorts of calls. It wasn't clear an obvious, it was impossible to say if it was inside our outside the box...just let the ref judge it on the field of play. Obviously we got a pen from it, but from my pure honest assessment this is where VAR is going wrong.

On-wards to Saturday, let's hope we get a better performance for the entire game.

Agreed.  I had hoped that VAR would only be used for gross refereeing mistakes, but it seems to be used to over-analyze too many calls on the field.  Goals are disallowed because a body part  is beyond the defender, the studio then draws idiot lines all over the place, wasting time, proving offsides by a millimeter.   Takes the life from the game.

Premier needs to wise up.  Glad for the three points, though.

Edited 7 December, 2020 by SaintSmitty
missed a word!

[Turkish]

Good to be back to winning ways, a good win, albeit a bit fortunate against a decent side. Good to see us grind out a win when not playing well. Lets hope Sheffield United dont sack Chris Wilder before the weekend.

[TWar]

Great effort. Excellent from Vestergaard, my man of the match. Also brilliant from KWP, JWP, and Bertrand. I think Romeu has had a couple of off days the last two games and am hoping he gets back to his best as he misplaced a few passes and got caught in possession and put us in a bit of trouble. Also I think Djenepo was pretty ineffective as was Redmond when he came on, I think we should be playing Walcott and Armstrong behind Ings and Adams for now and bring on Djenepo and Redmond when the opposition have tired legs.

[Ivan Katalinic's 'tache]

Poor first half rescued by Jannik's header. Better second half but was still fairly even. Ings and Redmond made an impact and Theo seemed more comfortable when he dropped back to the wing. Jannik immense again. Decent 3 points at a difficult place to go. Need to back it up by beating Sheffield Utd on Sunday now...

Edited 7 December, 2020 by Ivan Katalinic's 'tache

[Pilchards]

Some great comments and it’s brilliant when the other team never let you play well.

Romeu I thought was MOM although Vestergaard was quality too.

I think Armstrong needs a rest personally as he’s not been the same since that Covid scare.

Hoping for another 3 points this weekend too which should be possible.

[Harry_SFC]

2 minutes ago, Pilchards said:

Some great comments and it’s brilliant when the other team never let you play well.

Romeu I thought was MOM although Vestergaard was quality too.

I think Armstrong needs a rest personally as he’s not been the same since that Covid scare.

Hoping for another 3 points this weekend too which should be possible.

Armstrong was very anonymous and when he did get the ball he didn't really make the right decisions. I agree he needs a rest. 

[Kingsland Codger]

I’m delighted with VAR. Can you imagine the discussions there would be about our penalty incident had there been no VAR? The pundits would say something like ... that was close,  I want to have a look it again, the referee was too far away to make a decision. With VAR they now have the opportunity to look at it again but, more importantly, so does an expert referee (who knows the laws of the game backwards). Given this, why the moaning? Time has been taken, the incident examined closely and a decision has been made. 

[davefizzy14]

A very good win tonight against a tough opponent - good teams grind out wins and we are just that  

Vestergaard was absolutely immense tonight. His pass to KWP for our pen was a top drawer and a great header to level it up before half time. He was my MOTM. Romeu was quality too. We went up another gear when Ingsy came on, and a great pen too from him  it was deffo a pen I thought as KWP was clearly impeded twice by the Brighton player. I thought VAR got it correct.

Hopefully we can follow this up with another 3 points on Sunday against Sheff Utd.

 

Edited 7 December, 2020 by davefizzy14

[S-Clarke]

Just now, Kingsland Codger said:

I’m delighted with VAR. Can you imagine the discussions there would be about our penalty incident had there been no VAR? The pundits would say something like ... that was close,  I want to have a look it again, the referee was too far away to make a decision. With VAR they now have the opportunity to look at it again but, more importantly, so does an expert referee (who knows the laws of the game backwards). Given this, why the moaning? Time has been taken, the incident examined closely and a decision has been made. 

If that had gone against us you'd be raging. Absolutely not something VAR should be getting involved in.

[Kingsland Codger]

I disagree, it is exactly the sort of thing VAR should be getting involved in. Are you saying the best way to obtain a decision is to rely on a referee who was 30 yards behind the play with players obstructing his line of vision?

My stance on VAR is simple; an opportunity to review a match-changing incident is sensible. 

[hasper57saint]

We have played much better than this and lost. Personally I don’t give a shite about our penalty. We won! Only whinge I have is the relentless drivel that comes from Alan Smiths mouth. We will have 2000 Saints cheering us on for our next game and we will see wether they add to the flavour of yet another win. 

[Patrick Bateman]

10 minutes ago, hasper57saint said:

We have played much better than this and lost. Personally I don’t give a shite about our penalty. We won! Only whinge I have is the relentless drivel that comes from Alan Smiths mouth. We will have 2000 Saints cheering us on for our next game and we will see wether they add to the flavour of yet another win. 

Alan Smith is an utter pillock. Every time I watch a Saints match he's talking utter utter shite, some of which is factually incorrect too. 

Edited 7 December, 2020 by Patrick Bateman

[Baird of the land]

Not a fan of var  nor of the rule of fouling outside and then calling a secondary foul(once in the box)

if you are going to have var and its armpit offsides then that penalty call has to also be judged by same fashion by var.

if he fouls him which he does, then the secondary contact is caused by his foul, which stops kwp and since it’s in the box it’s a penalty.

[cloggy saint]

Like it or not VAR is here and no doubt we'll be on the wrong end of a similar call at some stage in the season so I'll take it. 

[Saint Pete]

25 minutes ago, Kingsland Codger said:

I’m delighted with VAR. Can you imagine the discussions there would be about our penalty incident had there been no VAR? The pundits would say something like ... that was close,  I want to have a look it again, the referee was too far away to make a decision. With VAR they now have the opportunity to look at it again but, more importantly, so does an expert referee (who knows the laws of the game backwards). Given this, why the moaning? Time has been taken, the incident examined closely and a decision has been made. 

I honestly don’t think anyone would have even spoken of that incident after the game had there been no VAR, I think pretty much everyone (even on here!) would have accepted it was outside the box and they could see why the ref on the field gave a free kick. I think on the whole VAR will prove to be a good thing in the long run, but they should operate it how it was sold in the first place, which was to eliminate the clear howlers made by the on field officials. At the moment, the VARs seem desperate to find things to overturn, often when the “evidence” is very inconclusive, like in this case.

[Lighthouse]

17 minutes ago, Baird of the land said:

Not a fan of var  nor of the rule of fouling outside and then calling a secondary foul(once in the box)

if you are going to have var and its armpit offsides then that penalty call has to also be judged by same fashion by var.

if he fouls him which he does, then the secondary contact is caused by his foul, which stops kwp and since it’s in the box it’s a penalty.

That's not so much a rule as it is a form of playing advantage. If the initial foul had been 10 yards out the box, with the second one inside there would be no argument about it.

[austsaint]

51 minutes ago, TWar said:

Great effort. Excellent from Vestergaard, my man of the match. Also brilliant from KWP, JWP, and Bertrand. I think Romeu has had a couple of off days the last two games and am hoping he gets back to his best as he misplaced a few passes and got caught in possession and put us in a bit of trouble. Also I think Djenepo was pretty ineffective as was Redmond when he came on, I think we should be playing Walcott and Armstrong behind Ings and Adams for now and bring on Djenepo and Redmond when the opposition have tired legs.

Ay?  Romeu was great tonight, together with Vestergaard, clearly the best two Saints players.  A fortunate win perhaps but Ings certainly was the catalyst for a better second half.   Maintains an incredibly good record we have against Brighton.

[Lighthouse]

Just checked and seen what an astonishing record we've got away to Brighton. W9-D2-L1 since 1982 😲

[cambsaint]

If you're reckless enough to clatter into a player just going into box then you deserve either a penalty or a red card.

He knew precisely that he intended to foul a player and prevent a clear goal scoring chance

Persoally I thought it was a pen all along and the ref couldn't have been able to tell the exact position from his position so VAR did its job.

I thought he was a shocking ref, seemed to allow pushes in the back, and Djenepo's foul? was never a yellow. A few minutes later a Brighton player deliberately hacked a Saint down across the shins and only a free kick. 

Doubt if Ward -Prouse intended to handle the ball but if you wave your hand in the area in the area you are taking a huge risk.

Awful match but a great three points and I'll take that all day long.

I wish that Ralph would sort out an end-game strategy, imo bringing on Stephens as an extra defender if poss, in the last ten minutes if we're winning.

I think the high energy high press game tires player out, both physically and mentally (which is just as important), leading to mistakes, and we don't seem to have a clear endgame plan. Manu was totally avoidable imo.

Still a great result, three cracking performances by Vestergaard, Bednarek and Romeu, and of course Ings looked a different class when he arrived, three points and fifth above both Mancs.

Come on you Saints.

 

[OttawaSaint]

2 hours ago, trousers said:

Just shut the f**k up Carragher you tart

You’d think he’d be keeping a low profile after saying Saints needed a scorer with Ings our for ages, only for that player to come on and net the winner.

[Saint Matty 76]

Romeu picked up a lot of loose balls, but my god he needs to stop getting caught in possession in the midfield. It must have happened 5-6 times today, with a few of them in the final 10. 

[skintsaint]

Happy with that, don't think we played at all near our levels but still come away with 3 points. Looked a pen just to me as the initial bump isn't the foul.

Half way to safety...

[SaintBobby]

4 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

That's not so much a rule as it is a form of playing advantage. If the initial foul had been 10 yards out the box, with the second one inside there would be no argument about it.

100% agree. Surely, the question isn’t where the foul started but where it finished. If, for example, you’re tugging at an opponent’s shirt over a twenty yard stretch, including as he enters the penalty area then its a penalty. Not a free kick forty yards out because that’s where the foul started.

[Singapore Saint]

Salisu my MOTM, did very well to get on the bench.

[Singapore Saint]

8 hours ago, Sheaf Saint said:

I disagree with those saying JWP would have scored if it was given as a FK, not from that position on the right. If it was on the left, maybe. But there's a very good chance he would have put it straight on the head of Ings or JV to bury it instead.

Top right hand corner? Just curls in. JWP always seems to aim for the nearest top corner.

[Foxy]

7 hours ago, S-Clarke said:

If that had gone against us you'd be raging. Absolutely not something VAR should be getting involved in.

Except the guideline, as I understand it, is that VAR has to get involved in line decisions. If I’m right in that they were right to take a look. Then the question is whether the foul continued into the box, after starting outside. If so we’re back in a place where people are confusing a rule they don’t like with VAR being a problem.

 

[Sheaf Saint]

46 minutes ago, Singapore Saint said:

Top right hand corner? Just curls in. JWP always seems to aim for the nearest top corner.

If he was left footed, maybe. Not a chance he would get a right footed shot over the wall and past the keeper at the near post from that position. It would have to be curled off the outside of his foot.

He's good, but he's not Superman.

[rooney]

A ground out win with Vest Mom. Oriel and KWP must learn not to fiddle with the ball and the lose it.

[SaintBitterne]

Vesty, Romeu and Kwp the best for us yesterday. Don't know what is up with Armstrong atm, but certainly not performing well.

Hopefully a fuller performance Sunday!

[Cabrone]

Played fairly poorly but still won, sign of a good team. Pen was very debateable but we've had a few against us in the past so it all evens out. 5th tonight and Ings back in, things are looking good.

[Chez]

First half was an absolute shit show. Like the Man U game, but without the two goal cushion. Poor choices, poor passing, poor control, lack of movement, lack of ideas, headless chicken press and a great deal of luck that we were not three down having been caught of the break several times.

It seems that when teams press us, we don't have the ability to beat it. Not many teams do mind you. I've seen Man City capitulate when Liverpool pressed them, so not surprising that can't cope. We just need that little extra time on the ball. Without it we get caught in possession, give the ball away and n general go backwards. When its failing so badly, the manager perhaps needs to implement a plan B, at least for a period of time. Play slightly longer and/or ping balls out wide...something to turn the opponents round a fraction.

When we pressed there was certainly no lack of effort, but three players going to the same man is extremely risky and at times we got made to look mugs.

Not sure what happened to change things. Ings obviously came on, and perhaps Brighton tired, but I'd like to think that it was just the team as a whole stepping up and making more effort to be open for a pass nullifying their press. It possibly was a combination of things, but mostly Brighton seemed to stop pressing. That was just what we needed (the space and time) and we played well second half, dominating possession, but also doing something with it to push them back. Ings was a factor - we just look more creative with him in the side, but the midfield and Vestegaard, with that little more time started to play forward through the lines. 

My MOTM was Vestegaard. He looked like Beckenbauer at times, intercepting balls and strolling out from the back, weaving in and out of players and then passing just at the right time. He even pinged balls like the great German used to do. What a display.

Title wining teams win when you play badly. Mind you, so does just about everyone when playing Brighton at their place. Half way to safety...

[tajjuk]

For me that is one where without VAR the player gets away with one, he is cynically fouling him for the whole phase to stop him getting through and creating a chance, he doesn't do enough to bring him down outside the box and eventually does in the box, but the ref from his position gives the initial contact and then VAR gives the clearer view. 

My only criticism is that the ref himself should have looked at the monitor. 

But without VAR there IMO March gets away with a cynical foul, he knew WP had got in behind him and was going to create a chance or have a chance so tried to push him over, failed with the first attempt and then cleans him out in the box. 

Like said above if he'd hacked him 10m outside the box but WP manages to stumble and stay on his feet, then gets hacked down completely in the box would anyone argue its a pen? 

Edit: I note even Carragher and Ljungberg on Sky aren't debating that it isn't for the second foul in the box, they just don't think it's a foul, they think its 'accidental' because March is already falling, but why are they falling? Because March tried to push KWP over and doesn't succeed, so that for me remove the 'accidental' away from it.

At the end of the day he's tried to cynically foul our player and there is clear contact in the box, if Liverpool can get pens for defenders literally kicking the ball away and the Liverpool attackers putting their foot in the way then that is a pen every day IMO. 

Edited 8 December, 2020 by tajjuk

[kjurwi]

There is no way that would have been a  penalty against Man U.

[the saint in winchester]

12 hours ago, DT said:

Worth saying how good that pass was for the pen from Vest. Pundits now saying not a pen. Hahahahahahha. Who cares? Mind the gap!

Rules of the game :

"If there is a foul on a player which starts outside the penalty area and continues inside then a penalty should be awarded." Ref gave a foul that continued inside.

End of. I thought it had gone to VAR to determine if a foul or just a swallow dive from KWP.

[Toussaint]

1 hour ago, kjurwi said:

There is no way that would have been a  penalty against Man U.

Would definitely have been a penalty for Man U though. I thought it was anyway, there was a secondary action when KWP was in the box.

[Toussaint]

10 minutes ago, the saint in winchester said:

Rules of the game :

"If there is a foul on a player which starts outside the penalty area and continues inside then a penalty should be awarded." Ref gave a foul that continued inside.

End of. I thought it had gone to VAR to determine if a foul or just a swallow dive from KWP.

its a bit embarrassing that highly paid pundits don't take the time to learn the current rules. 

[Danbert]

10 minutes ago, the saint in winchester said:

Rules of the game :

"If there is a foul on a player which starts outside the penalty area and continues inside then a penalty should be awarded." Ref gave a foul that continued inside.

End of. I thought it had gone to VAR to determine if a foul or just a swallow dive from KWP.

I think there would be far less controversy if idiot ex-players on the telly actually new what the rule is. It was a clear penalty - the foul started outside the box and continued inside. Suck it up.

[Totton Saint]

12 hours ago, warsash saint said:

What a shite interviewer!

yes - it was toe curling giving Ings the third degree trying to make him get jnto trouble and criticise the ref and VAR. Ings did well to deflect the grlling.

Vest was a collussus

 

 

[Charlie Wayman]

1 hour ago, kjurwi said:

There is no way that would have been a  penalty against Man U.

Yeah but we're a top six side now so we get the refs calls, always was like this, always will be.

[Gingeletiss]

It would help also, if we called them Laws, which they are, not bloody rules.

[John Boy Saint]

Quite weirdly I watched the catch up extended highlights on Sky - having answered an email I was waiting for just as I was heading towards the wooden mountain to Bedfordshire. Get upstairs and  Mrs JBS was snoring her face off (denies it obviously) with the TV on still and the game playing. 
Whilst first half we were a bit flat, second half we were much better, as has often been said “you defend from the front” the introduction of Danny Ings just gave Brighton something else to think about, other than don’t concede a foul just outside the box. Many comments already on here were about us not playing the best, but watching back without having to peer through my fingers we played what we were up against, a well organized team but lacking “in the red zone” thankfully. I think most of us are very guilty of watching through nervous eyes as we all know from the past we can put in a good gutsy performance and yet walk off the pitch empty handed, and a kick in the whatsits like last Sunday in injury time just fuels the fear. 
Admittedly there are times where we just fanny about with the ball and get stupidly robbed, at the same time we play so many balls where you think jeez we got away with that, many of those balls are likely played with a bit of deception only players we can’t afford spot and possibly pick us off. KWP won a ball where he made the Brighton player run with him and past the ball,  KWP had obviously taken the snapshot in his head of who was where, stopped spun round and passed the ball upfield, Brighton player was still heading towards the seafront. 
At the end of the day we won, fortuitous penalty or not - we are in 5th because we deserve to be there.

Thought Vestergaard was very good, as was Romeu, be interesting to see what happens in midfield when we get another hot and cold ref who hands him a soft yellow before the cut off. 

[Whitey Grandad]

14 minutes ago, Gingeletiss said:

It would help also, if we called them Laws, which they are, not bloody rules.

Bravo! As an ex-referee I can only applaud you.

To me it looked like a clear penalty, obviously a foul and comfortably inside the penalty area. The referee was not in a good position to see where it took place and luckily VAR set him straight. Despite what those on TV said it wasn’t two separate fouls but a continuous one.

I’m not a fan of VAR and in the olden days when they played real football it wouldn’t have been a handball penalty to them and we would have just accepted the referee’s decision on KWP and got on with the game.

[Totton Saint]

I think Haas. deserves some credit for Vest's and Romeo's vast improvement and for having the ruthlessness to sub Moussa and bring on Ings. It made such a differnece

[Turkish]

48 minutes ago, the saint in winchester said:

Rules of the game :

"If there is a foul on a player which starts outside the penalty area and continues inside then a penalty should be awarded." Ref gave a foul that continued inside.

End of. I thought it had gone to VAR to determine if a foul or just a swallow dive from KWP.

Dermot what his name the former ref just said it was pen for exactly that reason also saying Spurs got one very similar earlier in the season.

[eelpie]

12 hours ago, Kingsland Codger said:

I’m delighted with VAR. Can you imagine the discussions there would be about our penalty incident had there been no VAR? The pundits would say something like ... that was close,  I want to have a look it again, the referee was too far away to make a decision. With VAR they now have the opportunity to look at it again but, more importantly, so does an expert referee (who knows the laws of the game backwards). Given this, why the moaning? Time has been taken, the incident examined closely and a decision has been made. 

I

 

2 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Bravo! As an ex-referee I can only applaud you.

To me it looked like a clear penalty, obviously a foul and comfortably inside the penalty area. The referee was not in a good position to see where it took place and luckily VAR set him straight. Despite what those on TV said it wasn’t two separate fouls but a continuous one.

I’m not a fan of VAR and in the olden days when they played real football it wouldn’t have been a handball penalty to them and we would have just accepted the referee’s decision on KWP and got on with the game.

I've looked at the BBC's stills and I'm still not sure that there was a second foul in the penalty area. I'd like to see cameras focussing on the penalty box perimeters.. That would help to clarify incidents. And the referee should have access to these images before it is referred to VAR. imo. The ref could still have final input.. In the end issues of relegation and success hang on good decisions and too bad if it takes a minute longer.

[Mosin]

5 minutes ago, eelpie said:

I

 

I've looked at the BBC's stills and I'm still not sure that there was a second foul in the penalty area. I'd like to see cameras focussing on the penalty box perimeters.. That would help to clarify incidents. And the referee should have access to these images before it is referred to VAR. imo. The ref could still have final input.. In the end issues of relegation and success hang on good decisions and too bad if it takes a minute longer.

he took KWP out, the fact it started out side the area and kept going on into the penalty area is what makes it a penalty. its the laws of the game, if Carrager dont know the laws then he is in the wrong job.
 

[Toussaint]

3 minutes ago, Mosin said:

he took KWP out, the fact it started out side the area and kept going on into the penalty area is what makes it a penalty. its the laws of the game, if Carrager dont know the laws then he is in the wrong job.
 

day do doe dont dey doe, likche

Edited 8 December, 2020 by Toussaint

[VectisSaint]

1 hour ago, the saint in winchester said:

Rules of the game :

"If there is a foul on a player which starts outside the penalty area and continues inside then a penalty should be awarded." Ref gave a foul that continued inside.

End of. I thought it had gone to VAR to determine if a foul or just a swallow dive from KWP.

Where does that quote come from? I'm not sure that it is accurate, it certainly does not appear in the FA Laws of the Game. The FA Laws of the Game (https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct) actually state "If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick." No other type of foul (other than holding) has this type of clarification. I don't think anyone could say the foul was awarded for holding was it? The initial foul was a shove, and the action in the box was a trip. According to the FA Law 12 I don't think a penalty should have been awarded, the fould was not for March holding Walker-Peters. 

Still it was given, and I'm happy that we got one for a change. Carragher's assessment was garbage though, he clearly has no idea of the Law, was arguing against it for completely false reasons.

Edited 8 December, 2020 by VectisSaint