Back from the game - Palace

[wingnut]

After some excellent posts from Vision and Handbags, we're rapidly back to utter bullshit analysis like this:

will be interesting to see, when Brian gets HIS team in if we continue to go long or try to play progressive football through midfield-Watford and Bournemouth have shown that you can get promoted and hold your own by playing that way.

[Extended-Phenotype]

And however some people want to rewrite Friday night as a massacre , long range efforts and set pieces were pretty much all they had.

Agree with all of you last point except the quoted part. I'm not sure who's rewriting history here as I remember Ali al-Habsi being exposed on plenty of occasions, particularly in the first half. From memory:-

* Adebayor one-on-one after being played through on the inside left channel.
* Bolasie one-on-one after dummying Cooper out of the game before firing straight at an exposed al-Habsi, and Ledley's follow up over the bar with the goal gaping.
* Bolasie putting two efforts from within the penalty area into the side netting.

They also created a couple of (more difficult) opportunities from set plays.

Second half, granted they didn't have as many open play opportunities but regardless of how you create them a chance is a chance and the goal still counts as one. And they had more than us - the Cabaye free kick (which almost certainly would have been an open play opportunity had Cooper not brought Zaha down), the headers off the line, the goal.

Argue the toss all you like, but they created numerous very presentable chances from both open and set play, particularly in the first half. Nobody can argue that we probably should have been out of the game by the time the penalty was given.

Disagree. We shouldn't because we weren't. You don't get points for nearly scoring. At that point of the game, they had managed to score as many as we had. As in none. They couldn't score. Thanks only to the penalty, they could.

Which means 0-0 would have been the fair result, as that is what the score would have been if the ref hadn't so desperately wanted to send the Prem team through.

[No Fixed Abode]

And however some people want to rewrite Friday night as a massacre , long range efforts and set pieces were pretty much all they had.

Agree with all of you last point except the quoted part. I'm not sure who's rewriting history here as I remember Ali al-Habsi being exposed on plenty of occasions, particularly in the first half. From memory:-

* Adebayor one-on-one after being played through on the inside left channel.
* Bolasie one-on-one after dummying Cooper out of the game before firing straight at an exposed al-Habsi, and Ledley's follow up over the bar with the goal gaping.
* Bolasie putting two efforts from within the penalty area into the side netting.

They also created a couple of (more difficult) opportunities from set plays.

Second half, granted they didn't have as many open play opportunities but regardless of how you create them a chance is a chance and the goal still counts as one. And they had more than us - the Cabaye free kick (which almost certainly would have been an open play opportunity had Cooper not brought Zaha down), the headers off the line, the goal.

Argue the toss all you like, but they created numerous very presentable chances from both open and set play, particularly in the first half. Nobody can argue that we probably should have been out of the game by the time the penalty was given.

Disagree. We shouldn't because we weren't. You don't get points for nearly scoring. At that point of the game, they had managed to score as many as we had. As in none. They couldn't score. Thanks only to the penalty, they could.

Which means 0-0 would have been the fair result, as that is what the score would have been if the ref hadn't so desperately wanted to send the Prem team through.

WTAF?

[Extended-Phenotype]

What was the score before the penalty?

[No Fixed Abode]

:lol:

What was the score before the penalty?

The only score that matters is the one at FT.

[Extended-Phenotype]

Which would have been 0-0 had the ref not given the penalty.

Just saying it's disingenuous to suggest we should have been out of the game by the time the pen was given anyway. We weren't, it was 0-0 and they couldn't an didn't score until the pen.

[tidus_mi2]

:lol:

What was the score before the penalty?

The only score that matters is the one at FT.

It was 0-0 before the penalty which shouldn't have been given, their 2nd goal only came about as we were down to 10 and having to push forward to look for an equaliser.

It's not absurd to suggest it would have ended 0-0 as Palace were certainly struggling to find a goal.

[Platypuss]

It is absurd to try to suggest anything to Kes though.

[Maguire]

Disagree. We shouldn't because we weren't. You don't get points for nearly scoring. At that point of the game, they had managed to score as many as we had. As in none. They couldn't score. Thanks only to the penalty, they could

Exactly this - people looking to back up their opinion often award misses as goals in their final analysis. Why "should" they have been out of sight? If they were better at football they might have been, but they weren't. There wasn't any dark reason why they were robbed of a lead, they just weren't good enough to score.

[genome]

One of my IRL m8s criticised the performance as "if it wasn't for Al-Habsi we would've lost 5-0"

[floyd__streete]

Of course it wasn't a penalty and of course it changed the game. If that nonsense decision wasn't made then we almost certainly hold out for a hard-earned 0-0. I thought that the effort and endeavour we showed deserved to grind out a draw were it not for the intervention of Dean/Bolasie. I am usually philosophical about refereeing decisions but this one cost us dearly in our most important game of the season, thanks very much Palace were by far the better team as they have by far better players than us, so it is a bit disappointing that they had to cheat to get past us.

[Victor Meldrew]

After some excellent posts from Vision and Handbags, we're rapidly back to utter bullshit analysis like this:

will be interesting to see, when Brian gets HIS team in if we continue to go long or try to play progressive football through midfield-Watford and Bournemouth have shown that you can get promoted and hold your own by playing that way.

Care to explain oh wise one or at least express a view-how is this bullshit?
Don't you want us to play a style of football to get promoted and the next time stay there for a bit longer?
Aren't you interested in the type of side Brian builds this time?
Care to do your own analysis or is it beyond you and the limit of your insight is to just call somebody's view "bullshit" and offer zilch yourself?

[Ian Royal]

After some excellent posts from Vision and Handbags, we're rapidly back to utter bullshit analysis like this:

will be interesting to see, when Brian gets HIS team in if we continue to go long or try to play progressive football through midfield-Watford and Bournemouth have shown that you can get promoted and hold your own by playing that way.

Care to explain oh wise one or at least express a view-how is this bullshit?
Don't you want us to play a style of football to get promoted and the next time stay there for a bit longer?
Aren't you interested in the type of side Brian builds this time?
Care to do your own analysis or is it beyond you and the limit of your insight is to just call somebody's view "bullshit" and offer zilch yourself?

It's probably something to do with us not playing anything like long ball, that shows your post up to be utter bullshit Vic.

[leon]

Disagree. We shouldn't because we weren't. You don't get points for nearly scoring. At that point of the game, they had managed to score as many as we had. As in none. They couldn't score. Thanks only to the penalty, they could

Exactly this - people looking to back up their opinion often award misses as goals in their final analysis. Why "should" they have been out of sight? If they were better at football they might have been, but they weren't. There wasn't any dark reason why they were robbed of a lead, they just weren't good enough to score.

This was my view. After 85 minutes they hadn't scored and then a combination of a shit ref and a bit of naivety and that's that.

Norwood stunk the place out tbf

[Ian Royal]

Disagree. We shouldn't because we weren't. You don't get points for nearly scoring. At that point of the game, they had managed to score as many as we had. As in none. They couldn't score. Thanks only to the penalty, they could

Exactly this - people looking to back up their opinion often award misses as goals in their final analysis. Why "should" they have been out of sight? If they were better at football they might have been, but they weren't. There wasn't any dark reason why they were robbed of a lead, they just weren't good enough to score.

This was my view. After 85 minutes they hadn't scored and then a combination of a shit ref and a bit of naivety and that's that.

Mostly +1

Clearly they'd had more chances and should really have scored a couple but we'd defended our box, if not half, very well and they hadn't scored. There's no reason to think they'd have managed it in the remaining 5 - 10 without the penalty. Although, again I differ slightly in that it was soft of fuk but I don't blame the ref for making that call under the circumstances, and I do think Cooper was very very foolish.

[Longhorn1970]

Of course it wasn't a penalty and of course it changed the game. If that nonsense decision wasn't made then we almost certainly hold out for a hard-earned 0-0. I thought that the effort and endeavour we showed deserved to grind out a draw were it not for the intervention of Dean/Bolasie. I am usually philosophical about refereeing decisions but this one cost us dearly in our most important game of the season, thanks very much Palace were by far the better team as they have by far better players than us, so it is a bit disappointing that they had to cheat to get past us.

They won fair and square. what ifs don't win games ..

[Victor Meldrew]

After some excellent posts from Vision and Handbags, we're rapidly back to utter bullshit analysis like this:

Care to explain oh wise one or at least express a view-how is this bullshit?
Don't you want us to play a style of football to get promoted and the next time stay there for a bit longer?
Aren't you interested in the type of side Brian builds this time?
Care to do your own analysis or is it beyond you and the limit of your insight is to just call somebody's view "bullshit" and offer zilch yourself?

It's probably something to do with us not playing anything like long ball, that shows your post up to be utter bullshit Vic.

So what do you think Cox was doing for the 60 minutes that he was on the pitch?
From where I was sat he was aimlessly challenging the 2 Palace centre-backs as the ball was hit vaguely in his direction.
Were you actually there Ian this time for one of your rare appearances?
"Utter bullshit"eh?

[Extended-Phenotype]

Of course it wasn't a penalty and of course it changed the game. If that nonsense decision wasn't made then we almost certainly hold out for a hard-earned 0-0. I thought that the effort and endeavour we showed deserved to grind out a draw were it not for the intervention of Dean/Bolasie. I am usually philosophical about refereeing decisions but this one cost us dearly in our most important game of the season, thanks very much Palace were by far the better team as they have by far better players than us, so it is a bit disappointing that they had to cheat to get past us.

They won fair and square. what ifs don't win games ..

I've never seen you say anything positive about Reading. Or side with Reading on something. Or defend them. Or seem remotely pleased or praiseworthy when the win or play well, however rare that may be. Or seem anything but gleefully delighted when something doesn't go their way.

It's weird. I mean there's critical. And there's trying to be impartial and balanced. Or realistic and outspoken. But with you its just constant flaming. Worse than how a rival fan would be.

The only person on here I've ever seen you agree with is someone who doesn't support Reading, and supports Chelsea.

I just find it a bit odd. Why would anyone support a team they just loathe so completely and relentlessly? I mean, it just seems such a waste of your time, m8?

[CountryRoyal]

Of course it wasn't a penalty and of course it changed the game. If that nonsense decision wasn't made then we almost certainly hold out for a hard-earned 0-0. I thought that the effort and endeavour we showed deserved to grind out a draw were it not for the intervention of Dean/Bolasie. I am usually philosophical about refereeing decisions but this one cost us dearly in our most important game of the season, thanks very much Palace were by far the better team as they have by far better players than us, so it is a bit disappointing that they had to cheat to get past us.

They won fair and square. what ifs don't win games ..

I've never seen you say anything positive about Reading. Or side with Reading on something. Or defend them. Or seem remotely pleased or praiseworthy when the win or play well, however rare that may be. Or seem anything but gleefully delighted when something doesn't go their way.

It's weird. I mean there's critical. And there's trying to be impartial and balanced. Or realistic and outspoken. But with you its just constant flaming. Worse than how a rival fan would be.

The only person on here I've ever seen you agree with is someone who doesn't support Reading, and supports Chelsea.

I just find it a bit odd. Why would anyone support a team they just loathe so completely and relentlessly? I mean, it just seems such a waste of your time, m8?

I don't mean to be a dick E-P but this was really hard to read.

Sorry for being a grammar nazi.

[wingnut]

After some excellent posts from Vision and Handbags, we're rapidly back to utter bullshit analysis like this:

will be interesting to see, when Brian gets HIS team in if we continue to go long or try to play progressive football through midfield-Watford and Bournemouth have shown that you can get promoted and hold your own by playing that way.

Care to explain oh wise one or at least express a view-how is this bullshit?
Don't you want us to play a style of football to get promoted and the next time stay there for a bit longer?
Aren't you interested in the type of side Brian builds this time?
Care to do your own analysis or is it beyond you and the limit of your insight is to just call somebody's view "bullshit" and offer zilch yourself?

For two reasons:
1. For the umpteenth time, we are not playing long ball. A few over-hit balls to Cox doesn't mean we're now playing route one. Personally, I've absolutely no problem with adopting a more direct style - it has brought us the most success after all, and endless sideways passes amongst our back four bores the tits off me.
2. And chiefly, it's the utter bullshit phrase "progressive football". It's just completely meaningless - the sort of corporate horseshit Adkins used to come out with.