Saints 0-0 West Ham - Match Thread

[Wade Garrett]

We were much the better side.  Excellent defensively and Borja frightened them to death when he came in.  Looks a real handful.

How we didn’t win is beyond me.  Mind you, 2 really good attacking situations and the red stops the game.  He was poor.

 

Edited 11 September, 2021 by Wade Garrett

[macca155]

1 hour ago, Lee On Solent Saint said:

Absolutely agree with this. For far too long we have shied away from the confrontations in a game. Am nit a huge fan of Stephens, but fair play to him.

I guess it comes from confidence plus having a unit like Salisu next to him helps. He's keeping Bendarek, who did well for Poland, on the bench 

That is a good sign.

[woodsaint1]

1 hour ago, Streaky said:

Stephens has been superb this season not that most on here would admit it. They like there scapegoats and don't believe players can get better at any point in there career.

Hes been excellent. Thing is hes done this before in his Saints career where he puts in a stretch of good performances but then it all comes crashing down with a clusterfuck of a mistake. If he can maintain the consistency then him and Salisu can be a great pairing for us going forward

[Matthew Le God]

12 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

How we didn’t win is beyond me.  Mind you, 2 really good attacking situations and the red stops the game.  He was poor.

It was a genuine head injury, so he was doing his job correctly by stopping the game.

Edited 11 September, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[LeBizzier69]

2 hours ago, Verbal said:

Endeth.  You thucked that up

Thought I’d add a modern twist…

[Pamplemousse]

Interesting post-match interview with Ralph. Says we prepared for 2 weeks by trying something different. I have to say, given the amount of goals we've conceded, we needed something different, and defensively it worked. I've always thought that a manager should always prioritise the defence. You concede nothing and you're guaranteed a point.

 

My view is it's easier to fix the attack knowing you have a solid foundation behind you. Obviously against Man City next week we'll have to be much more solid still to get anything. But going forward, it's progress.

 

AND it shows he has a Plan B.

[The Cat]

I was more annoyed about him stopping the game to send Antonio off. Just wait until play stops and do it then. We were on the break and had would have had a good chance to get a decent shot in.

[Matthew Le God]

6 minutes ago, The Cat said:

I was more annoyed about him stopping the game to send Antonio off. Just wait until play stops and do it then. We were on the break and had would have had a good chance to get a decent shot in.

The rules say you can't play on if a player is to be sent off and there is no clear opportunity to score (which there wasn't as we were in our own half!).

So again... the ref was doing his job correctly.

Quote

Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play, violent conduct or a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

Edited 11 September, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[Billy the Kidd]

2 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

The rules say you can't play on if a player is to be sent off. So again... he was doing his job correctly.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

Not if you interpret that as a clear opportunity to score a goal. I’d suggest us breaking away with hardly any of their defenders was pretty clear. For us anyway. 

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, Billy the Kidd said:

Not if you interpret that as a clear opportunity to score a goal. I’d suggest us breaking away with hardly any of their defenders was pretty clear. For us anyway. 

We were in our own half of the pitch, it was never going to be deemed a clear opportunity to score. Not even remotely close to counting as a clear opportunity.

[Whitey Grandad]

4 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

We were in our own half of the pitch, it was never going to be deemed a clear opportunity to score. Not even remotely close to counting as a clear opportunity.

I think you’ll find that we were well into their half with good attacking possibilities. He should have waited a few seconds more to see how it developed.

[Matthew Le God]

4 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

I think you’ll find that we were well into their half with good attacking possibilities. He should have waited a few seconds more to see how it developed.

That is simply not even close to being true. At the moment he blew his whistle Saints were still in their own half. About 20 yards inside our own half!

It was a good opportunity for a break, but not remotely close to warranting a 'clear opportunity for a goal'. So the referee was correctly applying rule 12 by stopping the game to send him off.

 

Edited 11 September, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[Billy the Kidd]

8 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

We were in our own half of the pitch, it was never going to be deemed a clear opportunity to score. Not even remotely close to counting as a clear opportunity.

We had a good opportunity, the ref could have seen it play out, he didn’t, but on another day he could, and who knows what May have happened. Thing is Matt, not everything is clear cut, or black and white, as well you know. Football is largely about interpretations and opinions, even/especially for the referees. 

[Billy the Kidd]

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

That is simply not even close to being true. At the moment he blew his whistle Saints were still in their own half. About 20 yards inside our own half!

It was a good opportunity for a break, but not remotely close to warranting a 'clear opportunity for a goal'. So the referee was correctly applying rule 12 by stopping the game to send him off.

 

Again, he only needed wait a free seconds, and he chose not to. I’m not doubting the rule, just the interpretation, I mean it may not have even been another yellow door Antonio, I’m not sure he touched him. Again, down to interpretation of the rules. 

[Toussaint]

28 minutes ago, Pamplemousse said:

 

AND it shows he has a Plan B.

Look forward to plan c being unveiled  in 2024

Edited 11 September, 2021 by Toussaint

[niceandfriendly]

Meme King is correct, the ref was right. But the rules are absolutely wrong and should be changed. Wave a physio on if we're that worried about his poor little cottons, we can play around them like they do in rugby. It's not hard.

*talking about the head injury not Antonio, which was terrible refereeing. Ok think I'm talking about different situation to you chaps

Edited 11 September, 2021 by niceandfriendly

[Forester]

I think so far this season there are a number of positives to build on, and this was a decent point against a team that finished 6th last season and have been scoring for fun this season.

Biggest plus for me so far has been to see Ralph play three formations already, and no longer appear to be a one club golfer.  Bodes well for the season.

Today was a properly impressive defensive performance with both centre backs looking proper top players, not often you say that about Saints defenders, and Perraud impressive both attacking and defensive.  Clearly Broja was hugely impressive, but also Diallo did well coming on for a below par Romeu.

Table won’t look great I suspect after next week but that is fine as we will have played three of last season’s top six in our first five games and will have either lost one or two games.  Competition for places all over the pitch now with nobody (other than JWP?) certain of starting now.

 

Feeling quite positive 

[Sheaf Saint]

Been out today so just watched the highlights. Hard to get any impression of the overall performance from that, but Broja looks very confident for such a young lad. Gonna be hard to leave him on the bench if he keeps putting in displays like that.

Couple of decent saves from Macca. I know he's everyone's favourite scapegoat but he's actually looked OK so far this season, as he did in the first half of last season.

Redmond gets put clean through and STILL waits for 4 defenders to get back before shooting, then chooses the wrong option when the ball came back to him. Such an infuriating player.

A clean sheet. A point against a team that has seemingly beaten us with ease in every match in recent years. 3 points better off than from the corresponding fixtures last season. Definite reasons to be positive.

[Matthew Le God]

7 minutes ago, Billy the Kidd said:

We had a good opportunity, the ref could have seen it play out, he didn’t, but on another day he could, and who knows what May have happened. Thing is Matt, not everything is clear cut, or black and white, as well you know. Football is largely about interpretations and opinions, even/especially for the referees. 

As I posted earlier the rules state no advantage should be played or waited for if there is no clear opportunity to score. The tackle was close to our penalty box and play was stopped 20 yards inside our own half. It was a good opportunity to break, but being in your own half is never going to be viewed in the rules as a clear opportunity to score.

[Matthew Le God]

6 minutes ago, niceandfriendly said:

Meme King is correct, the ref was right. But the rules are absolutely wrong and should be changed. Wave a physio on if we're that worried about his poor little cottons, we can play around them like they do in rugby. It's not hard.

*talking about the head injury not Antonio, which was terrible refereeing

He applied rule 12 to the Antonio sending off correctly. 

[verlaine1979]

Slightly depressing that our most impressive striker is a kid on loan from Chelsea, rather than the £30m of Championship strikers we've acquired over the past couple of seasons. If RH wants to persist with one up front, Broja is pretty much the only option, and on today's evidence he should also start when we play two up top.

Redmond was dire after a nice cameo against Newcastle. Not at all predictable. Would rather have Tella in the side for pace on the break, since Redmond is both slow in terms of flat out pace and no more likely to do anything useful with the ball once he gets where he's going.

[Whitey Grandad]

18 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

That is simply not even close to being true. At the moment he blew his whistle Saints were still in their own half. About 20 yards inside our own half!

It was a good opportunity for a break, but not remotely close to warranting a 'clear opportunity for a goal'. So the referee was correctly applying rule 12 by stopping the game to send him off.

 

That doesn’t show the situation in their half. Do you have a wider view? (Unlike the referee)

5 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

He applied rule 12 to the Antonio sending off correctly. 

I’m not saying that he didn’t but the whole stadium could see the overall situation. He could and should have waited a few seconds more. He also has a duty to allow advantage where the non offending team will benefit. Not even a glance over his right shoulder.

[niceandfriendly]

24 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

He applied rule 12 to the Antonio sending off correctly. 

Interested to hear your view on my first point. I think that would make a big improvement to the game

[Convict Colony]

Chelsea's youth team would probably be a mid table premier league side.

[OttawaSaint]

3 hours ago, SaintTex said:

Redmond: my job is to assist the forwards

Bob: ah so you pass or cross the ball so a forward can score?

Redmond: ah no, other players do that 

Bob: so you don’t actually assist the forwards?

[saintwbu]

Whole back 5 were brilliant today, but first time i’ve seen Perraud play and thought he was brilliant. Got up and back really well but was also good on his one on one defending, recovered brilliantly a couple of times too when West Ham broke. Tino broke out well so many times but no one came up with him and he’d be forced inside or would end up giving the ball away, what a talent though. Broja’s first touch to push it past Ogbonna just breathed life into the stadium, he looks really exciting. A good result, could’ve probably been 3 points but we showed a different side to us today. Stephens was top drawer, Antonio has tormented him in previous games and Stephens completely shackled him from the start and ultimately got him sent off by making him lose his head for the first yellow card. Salisu also great, passing out let him down a few times but defensively he got everything spot on.

[Viking Saint]

4 hours ago, cloggy saint said:

 

 

 

 

All well and good making faces. We've been let down consistently for so bloody long that it's no surprise that fans fear the worst 

[Kingsland Codger]

The score may have been 0-0 and no doubt the media tonight and tomorrow will be all about Ronaldo and Lukaku but we all witnessed a thoroughly entertaining game of football today. End-to-end, ding-dong stuff. A tiny bit frustrating we didn’t get the win but delighted with the clean sheet and the play from our newcomers; Perraud, Tino and Broja all looked good and Armstrong had a thankless task and needed more support upfront. Well done to both teams for putting on a cracking display.

[UpweySaint]

His end product is still lacking but Djenepo and Perraud showed early signs of a good partnership down the left. Some real plus points to come out of today - really solid at the back and it felt like we had options - even if we didn't use them all. Last year I looked at the bench and shrugged - this year when there is Broja, Armstrong, KWP, Diallo, Walcott, Adams, Tella I can see lots of ways we can impact a game. Ralph also made a good early sub!

[verlaine1979]

18 minutes ago, adriansfc said:

Redmond is so slow, mainly because he won’t make a decision and rarely releases the ball quickly. Just dallies, tries to beat another man, take the extra touch. Not only does he throw away good chances consistently, but his losing possession often costs us on the break. I’m so exhausted of seeing him play for Saints. If we’re playing no10s or even wingers surely Armstrong, Tella, Djenepo, Walcott and Elyounoussi all offer more than him. There’s just no reason he should ever start now. 
 

Broja will be a great player. I’d just let him play and develop. Armstrong hasn’t hit the ground running and Che is hit and miss. Yeah he’s Chelsea’s player but will they want him? Will he want to go back? He’d have to score an insane amount to get a sniff of games for them. If he managed 10-15 for saints he’s done great, but they’d probably loan him out again. 

Wish Ralph would play Tella more, he’s never disappointed when I’ve seen him. We just look brighter and more positive with players like him and Broja. Redmond and Djenepo starting together just feels like the same old stuff and we all know we’ll struggle to create. 
 

Spot on. We know what we're going to get from Redmond, and we know it's not good enough.

[Kenilworthy]

1 minute ago, verlaine1979 said:

Spot on. We know what we're going to get from Redmond, and we know it's not good enough.

Redmond's contribution when coming on as sub at Newcastle was a strong reason for him to start today. His contribution today was a strong reason for him not to finish,

[GarrettIvo]

So ironic when we're saying the opposition is "there for the taking", as if we aren't there for the taking every single week.

[cloggy saint]

58 minutes ago, Viking Saint said:

All well and good making faces. We've been let down consistently for so bloody long that it's no surprise that fans fear the worst 

It's just such a spineless attitude.

[Matthew Le God]

2 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

He could and should have waited a few seconds more. He also has a duty to allow advantage where the non offending team will benefit. Not even a glance over his right shoulder.

He doesn't according to rule 12 when a second yellow offence been committed and there is no clear goalscoring opportunity. Being in your own half is not clear, there was not going to be an immediate shot on goal as required by the rules.

Edited 11 September, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[revolution saint]

17 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

He doesn't according to rule 12 when a second yellow offence been committed and there is no clear goalscoring opportunity. Being in your own half is not clear, there was not going to be an immediate shot on goal as required by the rules.

Do the rules state you have to be in the opposition half to have a clear chance of scoring?

[beancounter saint]

It struck me for the first time that we had 3 French speaking players starting today and a further 2 on the bench. Don’t know if this is coincidence or a deliberate strategy but it’s the highest number of speakers of a specific language other than English I can recall. Not quite at the Wolves level yet though!

[Matthew Le God]

20 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Do the rules state you have to be in the opposition half to have a clear chance of scoring?

If you are three quarters of the pitch away from the opponent's goal when the foul is committed then it is not 'clear'. Referees when interviewed have even stated that being a huge distance from the goal means it is not a clear opportunity in respect to a foul denying a goal scoring opportunity. 

[Whitey Grandad]

40 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

He doesn't according to rule 12 when a second yellow offence been committed and there is no clear goalscoring opportunity. Being in your own half is not clear, there was not going to be an immediate shot on goal as required by the rules.

Well there was. Broja was well into their half and about to race past the last defender and Diallo was about to play the ball through for him. It was clear to everyone in the stadium except for the referee and this is the key point. The referee was completely unaware of the situation behind him and never even glanced round to have a look and therefore was not in a position to decide if there was a goalscoring opportunity. It was poor refereeing even if he was within his rights to stop play right away.

David Coote. Remember the name. He is not without controversy and even during this game he made some weird decisions.

[Whitey Grandad]

4 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

If you are three quarters of the pitch away from the opponent's goal when the foul is committed then it is not 'clear'. Referees when interviewed have even stated that being a huge distance from the goal means it is not a clear opportunity in respect to a foul denying a goal scoring opportunity. 

We disagree. But I repeat my point. The referee never even had a look around.

Some referees might take the view that being a long way from goal is not a clear opportunity, but not all of them.

[Teddeer]

7 hours ago, Saints foreva said:

Prior to Broja coming on, 0-0 would feel like a good result but now it feels like an opportunity missed. We were the better side once he came on and were unlucky not to find the net. 

Redmond should be nowhere near this level, he is awful yet somehow plays the entire game. Unbelievable. 

Piss poor refereeing not to see how play would play out for the Antonio Red card. Looked like we were in. 

Broja should be starting but Ralph is blind. He should be among the first names on the team sheet because he is everything this team lacks - powerful, strong, direct, fast, skillful and good in the air and with his feet. If Ralph continues to omit him from the starting line up you have to ask yourself if he knows what he is doing.

[Matthew Le God]

26 minutes ago, beancounter saint said:

It struck me for the first time that we had 3 French speaking players starting today. 

Don’t know if this is coincidence or a deliberate strategy but it’s the highest number of speakers of a specific language other than English I can recall. Not quite at the Wolves level yet though!

If you are including Elyounoussi in those three then I doubt he is particularly fluent having only spent 2 years in Switzerland. 

[trousers]

36 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Do the rules state you have to be in the opposition half to have a clear chance of scoring?

 

12 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

If you are three quarters of the pitch away from the opponent's goal ... then it is not 'clear'.

Was Broja's effort that hit the post a 'clear opportunity' when he received the ball circa three quarters of the pitch away from the opponent's goal?

[Matthew Le God]

7 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Some referees might take the view that being a long way from goal is not a clear opportunity, but not all of them.

They'd be going against a statement from the general manager of the professional game match officials... Mike Riley.... their boss. 

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, trousers said:

Was Broja's effort that hit the post a 'clear opportunity' when he received the ball circa three quarters of the pitch away from the opponent's goal?

No, that wasn't a clear opportunity. 

[revolution saint]

9 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

If you are three quarters of the pitch away from the opponent's goal when the foul is committed then it is not 'clear'. Referees when interviewed have even stated that being a huge distance from the goal means it is not a clear opportunity in respect to a foul denying a goal scoring opportunity. 

Didn’t answer the question, is it in the rules? Given a lack of answer then I’ll assume not therefore it’s a question of interpretation. Given that Leicester didn’t just win a game but a title on breaking from deep on the counter attack and because Broja was in front of Diallo and had just sprinted clear and hit the post only minutes before then I would say it was a clear opportunity. You can of course interpret differently but the rules don’t deny the ref making a decision to allow play to continue.

[trousers]

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

No, that wasn't a clear opportunity. 

How close to the opponent's goal do you have to be for it to be a clear opportunity? 

[Matthew Le God]

1 minute ago, revolution saint said:

 The rules don’t deny the ref making a decision to allow play to continue.

Yes they do. Rule 12 states advantage should not be given for a second yellow offence if there is not a clear goalscoring opportunity. I have not denied that the attack we were about to have would have been extremely promising, but it wasn't a 'clear chance'. 

[kyle04]

3 minutes ago, trousers said:

How close to the opponent's goal do you have to be for it to be a clear opportunity? 

If you're Redmond, I'd say 6 inches?

[Matthew Le God]

10 minutes ago, trousers said:

How close to the opponent's goal do you have to be for it to be a clear opportunity? 

Refs have been asked on TV and stated that they are under instruction not to consider fouls a large distance from the goal as denying a clear opportunity on goal. Being on the edge of our penalty area is clearly a large distance. The whistle blew when we were 20 yards from the halfway line. Sure there was a good chance something may have happened from it, but it wasn't 'clear'.

Denying a clear chance is someone about to score and being hacked down, not someone maybe having a shot in 5 seconds time.

Edited 11 September, 2021 by Matthew Le God

[revolution saint]

5 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Yes they do. Rule 12 states advantage should not be given for a second yellow offence if there is not a clear goalscoring opportunity. I have not denied that the attack we were about to have would have been extremely promising, but it wasn't a 'clear chance'. 

That’s your interpretation and opinion. Nothing wrong with that but it’s still just your opinion.  I disagree with it.