Newcastle vs West Ham

[David Kelly 1400]

  On 29/08/2017 at 11:40, The Fish said:

He's not the only one thinking Clark was at LB, Louise Taylor also got it wrong.

  Had to double check on whoscored.com's heatmap page, but Mbemba was definitely at LB

Expand  

My eyes had confirmed where he was playing on Saturday.

[Alex 37894]

[Dr Gloom 24344]

Fish was too busy watching the movement off the ball to pay attention to positioning, obvs.

[The Fish 11432]

  On 29/08/2017 at 13:28, Dr Gloom said:

Fish was too busy watching the movement off the ball to pay attention to positioning, obvs.

Expand  

Too busy being a fucking hero, you mean?

[ToonMarshy 2]

Mitro getting aggro from FA over the 'off the ball incident'

https://www.nufc.co.uk/news/latest-news/mitrovic-charged-by-football-association

[Howmanheyman 38069]

  On 29/08/2017 at 11:59, David Kelly said:

My eyes had confirmed where he was playing on Saturday.

Expand  

My eyes seen it too but I'm glad the Fish confirmed it with a heatmap because it's better to be safe than sorry.

[Howay 12496]

  On 29/08/2017 at 16:48, ToonMarshy said:

Mitro getting aggro from FA over the 'off the ball incident'

https://www.nufc.co.uk/news/latest-news/mitrovic-charged-by-football-association

Expand  

This is the sort of shit from the FA that's ridiculous, the refs apparently didn't see it therefore didn't punish it on the field so the FA can punish Mitro after the fact meanwhile Kane hoyed in a potential leg breaker with zero chance of winning the ball simply because he was being a petulant, frustrated chode and since he was booked can't get into any bother. Lanzini suffered no injury meanwhile we've been without our new CB since the tackle.  

[RobinRobin 12979]

  On 29/08/2017 at 23:03, Howay said:

This is the sort of shit from the FA that's ridiculous, the refs apparently didn't see it therefore didn't punish it on the field so the FA can punish Mitro after the fact meanwhile Kane hoyed in a potential leg breaker with zero chance of winning the ball simply because he was being a petulant, frustrated chode and since he was booked can't get into any bother. Lanzini suffered no injury meanwhile we've been without our new CB since the tackle.  

Expand  

 

But those are the rules and, like Shelvey before him, there was absolutely no need to put himself in that position.

[OTF 8734]

  On 30/08/2017 at 02:41, RobinRobin said:

 

But those are the rules and, like Shelvey before him, there was absolutely no need to put himself in that position.

Expand  

 

The point is there's a double standard. Kane made a "tackle" with excessive force through a player, Mitrovic braced himself in a way that was dodgy and foolish. One of them involved excessive force and resulted in the injury of a player, the other resulted in no injury and an exaggerated reaction from the impacted player attempting to get attention from the referee. I'm not saying that either is right, but there is definitely a double standard in operation where the players reputation and the club involved impacts on the likeliness of a retrospective charge being brought upon them. The FA have previously changed their position regarding revisiting incidents that have been handled by the match referee so that should no longer figure in the equation. Mitrovic will get 3 weeks I'd say, in this case the charge bring brought is as good as a guilty verdict.

[Alex 37894]

  On 30/08/2017 at 04:59, OTF said:

 

The point is there's a double standard. Kane made a "tackle" with excessive force through a player, Mitrovic braced himself in a way that was dodgy and foolish. One of them involved excessive force and resulted in the injury of a player, the other resulted in no injury and an exaggerated reaction from the impacted player attempting to get attention from the referee. I'm not saying that either is right, but there is definitely a double standard in operation where the players reputation and the club involved impacts on the likeliness of a retrospective charge being brought upon them. The FA have previously changed their position regarding revisiting incidents that have been handled by the match referee so that should no longer figure in the equation. Mitrovic will get 3 weeks I'd say, in this case the charge bring brought is as good as a guilty verdict.

Expand  

That's absolutely spot on. There's also the aforementioned factor of it only being considered because MOTD decided to make an issue of it. You either have a committee or some such who goes through every match with a fine-toothed comb, checking every single incident and (to the best of their ability) doling out equal punishments or you don't have that but then accept that MOTD or Sky etc. highlighting something doesn't equate to an incident being investigated. That's the only fair way to do it so instead, of course, they go for an unfair, half-hearted middle ground.

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

Some footballers are ' not that type of player'.Unfortunately Mitro is that type of player so an 'elbow'' or two gets highlighted.

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

  On 30/08/2017 at 08:30, Alex said:

That's absolutely spot on. There's also the aforementioned factor of it only being considered because MOTD decided to make an issue of it. You either have a committee or some such who goes through every match with a fine-toothed comb, checking every single incident and (to the best of their ability) doling out equal punishments or you don't have that but then accept that MOTD or Sky etc. highlighting something doesn't equate to an incident being investigated. That's the only fair way to do it so instead, of course, they go for an unfair, half-hearted middle ground.

Expand  

Great post.You have just about copied an earlier post of mine word for word.

[Alex 37894]

Would've required me to read it tbh

[strawb 4769]

That mackem said he hadn't seen any evidence, so he should get off

[RobinRobin 12979]

But those are the circumstances, and, as with Shelvey, there are simply too many cameras around to avoid being caught.  This could have been avoided by not doing it in the first place.  It was completely off the ball and to no discernible purpose, other than he could.  There is little point in railing against the rules, although I understand the double standards.  

 

Should the severity of the injury impact on the punishment, or does one simply look at the incident.  If Lejeune had not been injured, merely fouled, would we believe that the yellow card was insufficient?  I don't know, but probably (possibly) not.

[The Fish 11432]

  On 31/08/2017 at 02:47, RobinRobin said:

But those are the circumstances, and, as with Shelvey, there are simply too many cameras around to avoid being caught.  This could have been avoided by not doing it in the first place.  It was completely off the ball and to no discernible purpose, other than he could.  There is little point in railing against the rules, although I understand the double standards.  

 

Should the severity of the injury impact on the punishment, or does one simply look at the incident.  If Lejeune had not been injured, merely fouled, would we believe that the yellow card was insufficient?  I don't know, but probably (possibly) not.

Expand  

 

I think scissor tackles are extremely dangerous and put unnatural pressure on the ankle and knee. I think that potential to cause serious injury should be taken into consideration when punishment is meted out. That's why two footed tackles are banned, tackles where you're off the floor and thus out of control and so on, their potential for causing injury is higher than a normal tackle.

[Howay 12496]

I'm not defending Mitrovic in any way, I was simply talking about how fucking stupid the FA's rules are.

 

I also disagree that if Lejuene hadn't been injured I wouldn't have thought a yellow was insufficient, I agree with what Fish said. It was a sending off offence tbh, Kane went in recklessly, with intent to hurt the player as he had no chance of winning the ball since he was coming through the back of the player.

Edited September 2, 2017 by Howay

[LooneyToony 41]

Two weeks from today around this time the mood of the fanbase will be firmly set.  Games @ Swansea followed by a home game vs Stoke. 

 

My hope is that our results are reasonable, so the fans that go to the games concentrate on supporting the lads on the pitch and not get sidetracked to shouting and singing songs about Ashley out. If the mood is focused toward Ashley during games we're in big trouble.

[Haydnator 45]

  On 02/09/2017 at 21:39, LooneyToony said:

Two weeks from today around this time the mood of the fanbase will be firmly set.  Games @ Swansea followed by a home game vs Stoke. 

 

My hope is that our results are reasonable, so the fans that go to the games concentrate on supporting the lads on the pitch and not get sidetracked to shouting and singing songs about Ashley out. If the mood is focused toward Ashley during games we're in big trouble.

Expand  

Agreed. A good points return from the next 3, Swansea (a), Stoke (h), Brighton (a), say 5+ points and the mood going into Liverpool (h) and the break after should be a fairly stark contrast to now. And I agree with the matchgoing fans at the atmosphere; as long as Rafa is here which I expect him to be, I'll do my utmost to support the team.

Edited September 2, 2017 by Haydnator