Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Boro v Huddersfield 2-1 (Watmore, Fletcher pen)


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, wilsoncgp said:

 

mcnairred_slower.gif.0de027f586b32e2fdabe489ddf2905e0.gif

Thought it was a red at first glance at the time, as it looked like he lunged and caught Bacuna. Watching that GIF confirms what I first thought, not sure that is getting over turned at all.

Good spot from the linesman, despite what Warnock says! 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 730
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  •  

    69

  •  

    53

  •  

    44

  •  

    42

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Just preparing myself for the game    

I'm at that point where I don't even think the team selection really matters- as long as we play hoof ball it doesn't matter who is in the team. That said, because we play hoof ball we certainly

I agree with @Borodane, the second half was very poor. We looked comfortable in the first 20mins or so of it but we had absolutely no intention of getting that extra goal. From about the 65th min they

Posted Images

Just now, wilsoncgp said:

I think you can see from the video that yeah, McNair is moving towards the camera in the photo so in that respect the camera photo is misleading as it actually looks more like he's moving towards the player. In that respect, looking at both the video and the photo is giving you a clearer picture.

But I also don't think it really matters in determining if it's a red card or not when you look at the position of his boot and his studs in the picture. It's catching the player one way or another. The only real difference is if he flies through the player or if he just catches him with his studs. In terms of judging if it's a red card or not, I don't think that matters? He's still caught him with his studs with the boot that's over the ball. It's still a red, for me.

I'm not even convinced your video shows him catching the player before the ball. Each to their own.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brunners said:

I'm not even convinced your video shows him catching the player before the ball. Each to their own.

That doesn't matter though does it? If he catches him on the follow through or before, he still should be sent off. Think back to Brighton at home when Dale Stephens got sent off, he goes in with his studs to win the ball, he gets the ball but catches Ramirez on the follow through with his studs.

image.png.a1f784599b72280213ccfa4ed37e7ca0.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Redcar Rioja said:

If video and photo angles weren't misleading then Hollywood would be in deep trouble and Bruce Willis and Arnie and Co.  would be in intensive care for life.

I’m not sure why that’s relevant. This isn’t Hollywood. The picture and video are of the same incident. Viewed together they present clear evidence as to why the ref made the decision he did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Humpty said:

I’m not sure why that’s relevant. This isn’t Hollywood. The picture and video are of the same incident. Viewed together they present clear evidence as to why the ref made the decision he did.

The ref didn't make the decision, the linesman did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Will said:

This is actually the clearest for me. That's a red, no question about it.

If you look at the very start of Wilson's GIF .. The ball is "loose"  and I don't think Mc'Nair can see Bacuna's moving direction, as Morsy is blocking his sight, while getting stiff-armed by Bacuna. 

For sure there was no intent in making a "leg breaker" from Paddy .. He is clearly only focused on the ball, but ofc Bacuna will stick a foot out to reach the static ball. 

Paddy connects with the ball on top of his foot, but his studs hit Bacuna's leg. But that's a side effect of the direction paddy is sliding .. His studs are not facing the direction he is sliding .. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

But straying off the red card incident why were we so poor in the second half? We finished the first half so strong, yet we were hardly in their box the entire second half and in the end we were fortunate to get a win. Think Warnock needs to think hard about the tactics he employed in the second half as it was only an inch away from costing us two points.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Borodane said:

But straying off the red card incident why were we so poor in the second half? We finished the first half so strong, yet we were hardly in their box the entire second half and in the end we were fortunate to get a win. Think Warnock needs to think hard about the tactics he employed in the second half as it was only an inch away from costing us two points.

We were thoroughly in control all 2nd half till about 65/70 minutes, when they started getting some good counter attacks and their new LB had oceans of space over there for some reason. Think we only had about 5 minutes at 11 v 11 where you could argue we weren't in total control of the game.

We didn't work their keeper enough during the start of the 2nd half, that's for sure though, especially with how poor he played we should have been peppering him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Brunners said:

We were thoroughly in control all 2nd half till about 65/70 minutes, when they started getting some good counter attacks and their new LB had oceans of space over there for some reason. Think we only had about 5 minutes at 11 v 11 where you could argue we weren't in total control of the game.

We didn't work their keeper enough during the start of the 2nd half, that's for sure though, especially with how poor he played we should have been peppering him.

When you only have a one goal advantage it's a very dangerous play to not try and get another goal. Especially if the other team has been weaker throughout. There comes a time when they will throw caution to the wind a bit more and as that happened we had to rely on luck. It's a risky gameplay and not something I think we should do. It was hardly Norwich away where we would just try to preserve the lead. Attacking wise we were really bad in the second half.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SmogDane said:

If you look at the very start of Wilson's GIF .. The ball is "loose"  and I don't think Mc'Nair can see Bacuna's moving direction, as Morsy is blocking his sight, while getting stiff-armed by Bacuna. 

For sure there was no intent in making a "leg breaker" from Paddy .. He is clearly only focused on the ball, but ofc Bacuna will stick a foot out to reach the static ball. 

Paddy connects with the ball on top of his foot, but his studs hit Bacuna's leg. But that's a side effect of the direction paddy is sliding .. His studs are not facing the direction he is sliding .. 

I'm not sure it matters if Paddy knows where Bacuna is or isn't or which direction he's moving. Intent only really comes into it when it's violent conduct or not. 

If he has contacted Bacuna's leg, whether intentional or not, it's endangering an opponent as he contacts his leg about half way up the shin. It's the tacklers job to ensure that this doesn't happen, same as it was with Branthwaite in the Blackburn game.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To follow up on my last comment - IF Paddy hits the ball with his studs, then it's reckless tackling .. But the fact he has the studs to the side, connecting with the ball on top of his foot, almost on his shin ... Makes it a questionable red for me .. Could be overturned, could not ..  Should only be a 1 match ban if any

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SmogDane said:

If Bacuna was 10 inches further away, Paddy would slide past him and the situation wouldn't look dangerous at all.

Well, obviously. But it's McNair's job when committing to the tackle to know if he's going to pose a risk to anyone, not being able to see someone isn't a valid excuse for dangerous play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...