This game and Ipswich away are the ones that really disappoint . More of this and you can forget top 4
Quote from: Olneythelonely on October 27, 2024, 11:24:28 AMQuote from: Percy McCarthy on October 27, 2024, 11:01:00 AMQuote from: eye digress on October 27, 2024, 09:49:13 AMCash was also covering the channel, though, wasn’t he? Either way, they shouldn’t have allowed so much space between them. Duran is watching the flight of the ball rather than the attacker, which is why he gets caught in no man’s land. Shame because, although it was a well-flighted ball, we didn’t make their striker work for the goal, and that may well have made the difference.Having watched the highlights (the game seemed more even to me live than in the highlights package), we really threw it away with our wastefulness. Duran obviously for his sitter, but Ollie also had a couple of good chances and Rogers surely has to hit the target from his shot on the edge of the box.It was 0-0 when Duran missed, so Barklay’s goal makes that irrelevant. Same with the ball going/not going out in reality.You can’t just ignore everything that happens before a goal though. If we’re wasteful in front of goal over 90 minutes, only score once and don’t win, our missed chances are definitely relevant.Maybe an early goal (McGinn’s for example) might have relaxed us and led to us having more space to score a second. But the principle of a goal changing the game still applies. Barklay’s goal just led to panic, and there’s no reason to believe that Duran’s chance, had it gone in about a minute earlier, wouldn’t have led to the same. One thing is for sure - if he’d have scored and there had been a kick-off instead of a goal-kick, the circumstances leading to Barklay’s goal definitely wouldn’t have occurred.
Quote from: Percy McCarthy on October 27, 2024, 11:01:00 AMQuote from: eye digress on October 27, 2024, 09:49:13 AMCash was also covering the channel, though, wasn’t he? Either way, they shouldn’t have allowed so much space between them. Duran is watching the flight of the ball rather than the attacker, which is why he gets caught in no man’s land. Shame because, although it was a well-flighted ball, we didn’t make their striker work for the goal, and that may well have made the difference.Having watched the highlights (the game seemed more even to me live than in the highlights package), we really threw it away with our wastefulness. Duran obviously for his sitter, but Ollie also had a couple of good chances and Rogers surely has to hit the target from his shot on the edge of the box.It was 0-0 when Duran missed, so Barklay’s goal makes that irrelevant. Same with the ball going/not going out in reality.You can’t just ignore everything that happens before a goal though. If we’re wasteful in front of goal over 90 minutes, only score once and don’t win, our missed chances are definitely relevant.
Quote from: eye digress on October 27, 2024, 09:49:13 AMCash was also covering the channel, though, wasn’t he? Either way, they shouldn’t have allowed so much space between them. Duran is watching the flight of the ball rather than the attacker, which is why he gets caught in no man’s land. Shame because, although it was a well-flighted ball, we didn’t make their striker work for the goal, and that may well have made the difference.Having watched the highlights (the game seemed more even to me live than in the highlights package), we really threw it away with our wastefulness. Duran obviously for his sitter, but Ollie also had a couple of good chances and Rogers surely has to hit the target from his shot on the edge of the box.It was 0-0 when Duran missed, so Barklay’s goal makes that irrelevant. Same with the ball going/not going out in reality.
Cash was also covering the channel, though, wasn’t he? Either way, they shouldn’t have allowed so much space between them. Duran is watching the flight of the ball rather than the attacker, which is why he gets caught in no man’s land. Shame because, although it was a well-flighted ball, we didn’t make their striker work for the goal, and that may well have made the difference.Having watched the highlights (the game seemed more even to me live than in the highlights package), we really threw it away with our wastefulness. Duran obviously for his sitter, but Ollie also had a couple of good chances and Rogers surely has to hit the target from his shot on the edge of the box.
As good as we are at the moment we won't actually win anything until we can be more clinical with the amount of chances we create.
I'm not convinced that the ball was out when Ollie pulled it back for McGinn. The only tv angle they showed wasn't conclusive at all.
Saw a real close close-up on twitter and judging by that, if that was out it was a funny shaped ball.And yes, VAR either shouldn’t have got involved or said assistant ref’s call.Shame, it was a great finish by SJM.
Yeah it looks clearly, if just, out to me. Thought so immediately at the time.
Quote from: Monty on October 27, 2024, 03:08:48 PMYeah it looks clearly, if just, out to me. Thought so immediately at the time.Can you see the different shape of the ball on one side to the other? Or is it one of my eyes?
Quote from: Percy McCarthy on October 27, 2024, 02:49:16 PMSaw a real close close-up on twitter and judging by that, if that was out it was a funny shaped ball.And yes, VAR either shouldn’t have got involved or said assistant ref’s call.Shame, it was a great finish by SJM.The distortion at the side of the ball is the digital artefact's from zooming in on the picture. As there is green showing I will accept that as the predominant colour and the ball is out. We just need consistency. Shame our cameras are so close to the by-line unlike Newcastle's. Any angle on the picture and they wouldn't be able to judge. And not sure why you think VAR shouldn't get involved on an absolute rather then a subjective decision.
Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.
Author
Topic: Aston Villa v Bournemouth Post Match Thread. (Read 20250 times)
