Saints 1-2 Grimsby: Match Thread

[Osvaldorama]

8 minutes ago, Saint Gifford said:

I remember watching Bristol Rovers v Grimsby at Wembley for Rovers to get back to the football league. (Both my boys are Gas heads). 
 

I know it’s one game in a disastrous season.
 

But to lose against a team who is set up for non league, div two just a few years ago, and still are now tbf. Should be a wake up call. 
 

Needs some really challenging questions around how long can the leadership team of the club continue on this Kamikaze vision imo.

At some point this has to be picked up by someone, or one of our official Supporters groups, or Community Trusts. 

 

 

 

Exactly this. 
 

For me it should never have been a pen. Yes he touched him, but the player doesn’t have a right to go down for that and VAR should have got him booked or diving. 
 

But I understand why it was given. They wanted an underdog story. The fact is we should have created and scored more. You can only control the controllables and we were outfought, outthought and outmuscled by a team that is barely league 2 standard. 
 

Its an utter, utter embarrassment and everyone involved with the club should be fucking ashamed. 

[Lighthouse]

3 hours ago, trousers said:

Lighthouse and MLG... Never before seen in the same room together... 

Lucky me.

2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Is football now a non contact sport?  Perhaps they should run around with little tags on their shorts and give the ball over if they have one taken off.

It’s a non combat sport, not a non contact sport. There is nothing in the rule book about an acceptable number of Newtons you’re allowed to strike an opponent with, just your own subjective opinions of how hard you expect our opponents to be, in order to do Saints a favour.

[Grimsby1984]

12 hours ago, spyinthesky said:

You are right there.

Quite understandably most neutral supporters and TV critics were on the side of Grimsby but I wonder if the two penalty decisions had been given against the plucky underdogs.

That said a Prem side, even one as currently crap as we are, should really have overcome these debatable decisions.

The only straws I am clutching at are Chelsea losing at home to Bradford City a while back and Pompey losing to non League Aldershot in the FA Cup not so long ago.

It was an anomally because normally the smaller club doesnt get the rub of the green which VAR gave us (ironically it was what i was worried about b4 the game :that ,pens and Ward Prowse )  , without VAR however bad you were you would have probably won -even though it worked in our favour i still dont even like it -long pauses , the moments are lost and they still dont even always get it right so its not only annoying  and confusing but for me not actually making the game any better .Its alright for the ball going over the line but all the other bits are still relying on human interpretation anyway so not sure what it adds apart from a few more jobs for the boys .

[Grimsby1984]

Got to say though Ward Prowse looked quality i think I have seen him down there 3 or 4 times over about 7 seasons the first time i saw him he was lightweight and was just  getting muscled off the ball ,but that was a long time ago hes physically a lot bigger now (must have hit the gym ) and has so much quality with a dead ball  and looks like he can control a game a lot more - maybe i have got that all wrong but remember I am not a regular !

[Weston Super Saint]

8 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

Lucky me.

It’s a non combat sport, not a non contact sport. There is nothing in the rule book about an acceptable number of Newtons you’re allowed to strike an opponent with, just your own subjective opinions of how hard you expect our opponents to be, in order to do Saints a favour.

It's clear in the rule book that you are not allowed to tug someone's shirt, you're not allowed to pull someone's arm.

You don't appear to be trumpeting all the times that happened during the game (from both sides) and demanding that free kicks and penalties were given for each occasion no matter how many Newtons were exerted.

I haven't seen you moaning about the push from the Chelsea player on Salisu and demanding a red card be given when he was walking slowly off the pitch - plenty of Newtons dished out there but your silence is telling.

[OldNick]

16 hours ago, bangkoksaint said:

Was it Ian Juryeff? I played in two such games - scored in one with a header at the Northem end too!! Great feeling wasn’t it, running out at StMarys in a Saints kit!!

yes it was

[Lighthouse]

2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

It's clear in the rule book that you are not allowed to tug someone's shirt, you're not allowed to pull someone's arm.

You don't appear to be trumpeting all the times that happened during the game (from both sides) and demanding that free kicks and penalties were given for each occasion no matter how many Newtons were exerted.

I haven't seen you moaning about the push from the Chelsea player on Salisu and demanding a red card be given when he was walking slowly off the pitch - plenty of Newtons dished out there but your silence is telling.

For the avoidance of doubt, yes I would give penalties and free kicks every time someone pulls back a player or their shirt. I don't care if it ends up in 15 penalties a game to start with, they'd soon learn, stop doing it and the game would be that much better for it. The fact that you can get away with a certain amount at the moment is no defence of what DCC. It's basically the football equivalent of being pulled over doing 37 in a 30 and saying, "yeah but what about all those other cars doing 34!?"

[Whitey Grandad]

18 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

For the avoidance of doubt, yes I would give penalties and free kicks every time someone pulls back a player or their shirt. I don't care if it ends up in 15 penalties a game to start with, they'd soon learn, stop doing it and the game would be that much better for it. The fact that you can get away with a certain amount at the moment is no defence of what DCC. It's basically the football equivalent of being pulled over doing 37 in a 30 and saying, "yeah but what about all those other cars doing 34!?"

They were both pulling each other's shirts before they even got into the box. Orsi takes a swipe at DCC who then flaps back. Which of these multiple offences do you penalise and with what sanction? This is a common question amongst referees and our mate on Wednesday got it wrong. 

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

For the avoidance of doubt, yes I would give penalties and free kicks every time someone pulls back a player or their shirt. I don't care if it ends up in 15 penalties a game to start with, they'd soon learn, stop doing it and the game would be that much better for it. The fact that you can get away with a certain amount at the moment is no defence of what DCC. It's basically the football equivalent of being pulled over doing 37 in a 30 and saying, "yeah but what about all those other cars doing 34!?"

You've taken a rather peculiar hill on which to make a stand.

The rules for giving a penalty are very clear and rely on the player commiting an offence inside the penalty area that would ordinarily result in a direct free kick.

The rules governing a direct free kick can be found here but include :

Quote

1. Direct free kick

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

 

• charges
• jumps at
• kicks or attempts to kick
• pushes
• strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
• tackles or challenges
• trips or attempts to trip

If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.

 

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:

 

• a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
• holds an opponent
• impedes an opponent with contact
• bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
• throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object

Your previous assertion that any single Newton being exerted is incorrect as the offence MUST be either careless, reckless or have excessive force.  Since DCC wasn't sent off, we can rule out 'excessive force' (but honestly, anyone with functioning eyes and any measure of common sense could see there was no excessive force!).  Given that DCC received a yellow card, we can assume that the ref ruled out careless and went with reckless.

The FA's definition of reckless states the player must act with 'disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent'.  The pertinent word here is 'danger'.  What 'danger' was there and what were the 'consequences' of DCC's limp wristed backhand slap?  At most there would be a small crease on the shirt!

The ref got the decision wrong, plain and simple.

The fact that DCC reacted is irrelevant, I think we all agree that he shouldn't have, but equally we can all see that there was no 'foul' committed and the ref fucked the decision up.

I'm all for following the rules, but they need to be applied as they are written and not made up on the spot.

[rallyboy]

On the scale the ref chose, which was that any contact is a foul, the attacker clearly committed the first offence with the push in the back.

Free-kick Saints.

The end.

 

Not even sure why this is still a debate...

[Grimsby1984]

Just got a ticket for the Brentford game it was only 16.50 ,alright its in the corner but thats £5 cheaper than league 2 proper bargain ! see what Brentford are like .

[Roo1976]

We lost but shit refs make shit choices ,mind you so do good ones,but in the end we just didnt play football.

[Killers Knee]

Saints were shit: end of.