Notts County (H) League Saturday 25/11/06

[Percie]

I think the priorities will then have to be a right sided midfielder

:?

Do we not have 3 players capable of playing in this position in M.Wright, Bedaeu and Wrack? No way is a right midfielder a "priority."

So you're saying that Bedeau is good enough to play regularly on our right side of midfield in the league above? I think a lot of the stick he gets is unfair, but he's not good enough to play there if we get promoted next year.
Wright showed last season that he struggled to cope with the standard. Yes, the management was poor, and I'll be happy to see him given a chance if we get promoted, but I think he'll be shown up as being one of the weak links again.
I think Wrack could cope with the standard as he knows the game so much better than the previous two, but chances are, he'll only play half of the matches.

That being said, surely there are other positions that need concentrating on first. A creative central midfielder for one, someone who will run with the ball and supply the forwards with some much needed service from the middle of the park.

A right back maybe? I do like Westwood there but he isn't a natural right back, I don't think we've had a proper right back since Bazeley.

Obviously I think we need at least another striker, hopefully we will be signing at least one in the next few months.

So, I couldn't agree, a right sided midfielder is not a priority, in my opinion.

[geoffwhiting]

Match report

Thought the ref was terrible! Geoff's right, Wright was caught, although the contact was slight. Westwood was tremendous and I thought Keates was aweful!

http://upthesaddlers.com/wp/archives/20 ... ned-fayre/

Thank you Neil - I sometimes wonder how people miss these things, but I guess it's usually the angle. I know 100% what I saw, and it's not debatable, it's fact. Glad of your confirmation though.

Wright went between two defenders, the nearer one to his left, the other to his right, and as they closed the gap he tried to jump through the gap to beat the challenge - that was NOT a dive, absolutely NO way, it was a strong attempt to clear the challenge because there was a good chance of them closing the gap on him and bringing him down. If he'd been looking to be brought down, he could have managed that dead easily, that much was obvious.

So, with his body through the gap and looking like he would get clear, his trailing leg followed (obviously) through the closing gap, and was caught by one of the Notts players - Wright was already airborne going through that gap - the ankle was caught, flipping his leg upwards and throwing him hands first onto the ground. As he had both feet off the ground at the moment he was caught, there was NOTHING he could do to prevent him flipping forward in that way.

All of this might not have been apparent from the "behind/above the goal" angle, but it was crystal clear to me, and still is! If you thought that was a dive, then you are quite simply wrong.

The Ref didn't book Wright because there was nothing to book him for. I thought the contact by the Notts player was probably accidental as he was just in his stride when his front foot came up and caught Wright's ankle, it was not malicious or intentional IMHO. A free kick to us yes, but nothing more than that should have come from that incident.

I'd take slight issue with you Neil on the "talking to" that Wright got from the Ref for that second challenge on their keeper. You said it was one of the few things that the Ref got right, but you also said (and I agree) that it was a ball that Wright had every right to go for. He reached the ball at the same time as the keeper, the ball was not unreasonably high, and they both had the right to challenge one another for it. There was contact, so what ? If TW hadn't gone for it he wouldn't have bumped into the keeper. You can equally say that if the keeper hadn't gone for it, he wouldn't have bumped into Wright. That's the nature of a 50:50 challenge. Nothing in that was wrong, it's just a physical challenge between two committed players going at the same ball from opposite directions, each with an equal chance of getting to it first. I fail to see why TW needed a talking to about that ! On the contrary, if he hadn't gone for it, we'd have been criticising him for pulling out of the challenge - the way we criticise MARK Wright so often for hiding from challenges.

[Cannock]

Sorry Geoff, you are some way wide of the mark. Could you re-iterate a few more points in the "dive" scenario as we don't have all the necessary facts on which to base an opinion. You may be suffering from selective memory as well as dodgy vision :lol:

PS. Can you send me your current e-mail as i don't have it after my hard drive exploded a few weeks ago.

Cheers bud.

[geoffwhiting]

Sorry Geoff, you are some way wide of the mark. Could you re-iterate a few more points in the "dive" scenario as we don't have all the necessary facts on which to base an opinion. You may be suffering from selective memory as well as dodgy vision :lol:

PS. Can you send me your current e-mail as i don't have it after my hard drive exploded a few weeks ago.

Cheers bud.

Cannock I am NOT wide of the mark, not even by a millimetre.

My side-on view was much better than your behind-the-goal-line view Cannock, I was absolutely right in-line with the incident, and I DEFINITELY saw the Notts player's foot catch Tommy Wright's trailing heel and that's what threw him over - it isn't a debatable point mate, there is no selective memory about it, it happened, it was as clear as daylight. Ask Neil again !

I'm not saying the Notts player did it deliberately, but I do know 100% that it was NOT a dive by TW.

I've PM'd my e-mail address to you mate. Can you update me with yours too, as I have 2 or 3 and am not sure which is right.

[Stu]

Geoff, you can't have a better view 'side on' that somebody who is directly in line...

From your view, all you could see was somebody stick out a leg, you've no clear view of whether thats actually in the way of the leg as it goes in a forward motion.

When he is running direct on to you, which he was to us in F2G, then you can see if there is any clear obstruction in front of him, and to be honest there wasn't.

I don't want to accuse our players of diving, but the fact that pretty much all who were sitting direct in front of the way he was running, with a clear view of what was obstructing him, say there is no contact is pretty clear.

Granted, you may have seen someone try to trip him up, but from our vantage point, there was nothing in front of him...

However his ridiculous attempt to throw his arms up and jump forward really just put the icing on the cake, as did his lack of protest when he didn't get it. He was shattered by that stage, had nowhere near the pace, legs or energy to outrun them and went for the easy option.

[geoffwhiting]

Geoff, you can't have a better view 'side on' that somebody who is directly in line...

From your view, all you could see was somebody stick out a leg, you've no clear view of whether thats actually in the way of the leg as it goes in a forward motion.

When he is running direct on to you, which he was to us in F2G, then you can see if there is any clear obstruction in front of him, and to be honest there wasn't.

I don't want to accuse our players of diving, but the fact that pretty much all who were sitting direct in front of the way he was running, with a clear view of what was obstructing him, say there is no contact is pretty clear.

Granted, you may have seen someone try to trip him up, but from our vantage point, there was nothing in front of him...

However his ridiculous attempt to throw his arms up and jump forward really just put the icing on the cake, as did his lack of protest when he didn't get it. He was shattered by that stage, had nowhere near the pace, legs or energy to outrun them and went for the easy option.

Wasting my time arguing here Stu, so my last words on it are that I saw exactly what I am saying I saw, I was directly in line and the defender's foot came up and quite visibly took Wright's ankle - no doubt, and right in front of me.

From your viewpoint the trailing leg would have been hidden to some extent behind TW, therefore not as easily visible as it was to us with the side-on view.

Neil R. has confirmed I was right in what I saw, and he would have had the behind-the-goal-line perspective. Just ask him again.

[Stu]

Okay, your right and obviously are because Neil agrees with you so therefore it must be right

We, the majority discussing this, are all wrong despite having a clear head on view.

Fair enough.

[OldPenkSaddler]

From your viewpoint the trailing leg would have been hidden to some extent behind TW, therefore not as easily visible as it was to us with the side-on view.

Neil R. has confirmed I was right in what I saw, and he would have had the behind-the-goal-line perspective. Just ask him again.

Its all about opinions and, as you know, I have the same view as you Geoff, but I saw it the same as Stu.

Don't think I'd rely on Neil's eyesight though- he still thinks Hector Sam is the best thing since sliced bread :D

[geoffwhiting]

As I said, final word, wasting time arguing over what I know I saw.

[Stu]

As I said, final word, wasting time arguing over what I know I saw.

True, but its your complete dis-regard for any other viewpoint despite the fact someone else in your stand saw it differently too.

But its all about opinions I spose...

[Cannock]

You know what you saw Geoff, everyone agrees with that. Unfortunately, what you saw didn't actually happen. Loss of vision, selective memory and now dementia. You're in serious trouble mate. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I think you need to e-mail Whalley and ask him to confirm, from a club perspective, which stand has the better overall view. Oh! Laugh my t.its off.

[geoffwhiting]

You know what you saw Geoff, everyone agrees with that. Unfortunately, what you saw didn't actually happen. Loss of vision, selective memory and now dementia. You're in serious trouble mate. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I think you need to e-mail Whalley and ask him to confirm, from a club perspective, which stand has the better overall view. Oh! Laugh my t.its off.

Oi, just shurrup Cannock, and send me your e-mail address, like I've sent you mine ! :lol: :lol:

P.S. It is obvious which stand has the better overall view, it's the stand where the charges are the highest and where the more-refined and knowledgeable fans sit. Also those who can obviously afford better glasses ! :lol:

[Pedagogue]

It is obvious which stand has the better overall view, it's the stand where the charges are the highest and where the more-refined and knowledgeable fans sit.

Absolutely right, Geoff - and I know that Cyclothymic and North Staffs Saddler will agree with you, also! :D I have mixed views on yesterday's referee. The caution of Wright was unjustified and was an over-reaction by the referee, possibly influenced by the crowd and that gobby no.5, Alan White, who never stopped whingeing all match. The second challenge was not cautionable, either, and was a clear attempt by Pilkington, the 'keeper, to get Wright sent off. If anything, Pilkington could have been cautioned for 'simulation'. I leave you guys to argue over the alleged dive, in the second half - I was not in a position to judge but I will say that the referee was well up with play and WAS in a good position to decide. The referee was too keen to dish out yellow cards in a game that was full of "blood and thunder" but was never nasty. In general, though, as Old Penk Saddler says, he was not THAT bad and certainly better than some we have experienced. He let the game flow and this helped make it the most entertaining at Bescot, so far this season.

[sniffer clarke]

Dive? Course it was. Had a clear view from directly in line and there was definitely no contact at all - in my opinion. Could not believe he was not booked. Impressive debut otherwise.

[Neuromantic]

How about the foul given against hector Sam in the corner ???

[geoffwhiting]

As I said, final word, wasting time arguing over what I know I saw.

True, but its your complete dis-regard for any other viewpoint despite the fact someone else in your stand saw it differently too.

But its all about opinions I spose...

True Stu, but I'd love you to see that trip/non-dive just once again ! :lol:

BTW, saw Leamore yesterday and passed on a Fanzine to him. I didn't see you at the match, in the Saddlers Club etc, but I still owe you the money for 3 copies. Will pay up next time I see you - OK?

[SaddlerSteve]

Wasn't at the game but i think its a bit pointless you all going on about if it was a dive or not.
Don't really care if it was or not.
He didn't get booked so whats the worry?










PS. Just in case its been forgotten in amongst all this "debate" on the diving issue....



.....we won, got ourselves 3 points, almost all our rivals lost, and we're top with a 7 point gap! :D

[geoffwhiting]

It is obvious which stand has the better overall view, it's the stand where the charges are the highest and where the more-refined and knowledgeable fans sit.

Absolutely right, Geoff - and I know that Cyclothymic and North Staffs Saddler will agree with you, also! :D I have mixed views on yesterday's referee. The caution of Wright was unjustified and was an over-reaction by the referee, possibly influenced by the crowd and that gobby no.5, Alan White, who never stopped whingeing all match. The second challenge was not cautionable, either, and was a clear attempt by Pilkington, the 'keeper, to get Wright sent off. If anything, Pilkington could have been cautioned for 'simulation'. I leave you guys to argue over the alleged dive, in the second half - I was not in a position to judge but I will say that the referee was well up with play and WAS in a good position to decide. The referee was too keen to dish out yellow cards in a game that was full of "blood and thunder" but was never nasty. In general, though, as Old Penk Saddler says, he was not THAT bad and certainly better than some we have experienced. He let the game flow and this helped make it the most entertaining at Bescot, so far this season.

So, as you seem to agree with my view on the booking and the "talking-to" of Wright, I must have seen them properly Leamore. Others seem to have seen them as bookable offences, some even say he was lucky at that point to have stayed on the pitch, which I consider to be utter nonsense. The referee was clearly heavily influenced by crowd reaction and the Notts players, rather than by the incidents themselves.

So, if I got those spot-on, is it not equally likely that I did NOT mis-interpret the trip / so-called dive, as I had a perfect view of it? :D

I always recall a similar incident with Byfield, who WAS sent off for diving just near the right edge of the penalty area at the Gilbert Alsop (as it was back then) end. No way did HE dive either, he tried to jump over an opponent who raised his foot and took Byfield's trailing ankle in mid-air, throwing him over in a very similar style to yesterday. Some said THAT was a dive as well, but no way, the Ref got it totally wrong. Fortunately, yesterday's Ref didn't.

That was one hell of a howler though that Daz has referred to. When Sam was in the corner right by the flag, ticking down the clock, and being hoofed and pulled all over the place by the Notts player, he had a free-kick awarded AGAINST him for muscling his way quite fairly out of the Notts guy's grasp. THEN they took the kick 12 yards forward from the corner flag, even though the incident happened in the quadrant by the flag, and even though a few minutes earlier, on another Notts free kick near the half-way line, he'd made a Notts player move the ball back about 5 feet ! Talk about double-standards? :x

[OldPenkSaddler]

As I said, final word, wasting time arguing over what I know I saw.

You seem to have had more comebacks than Sinatra on this one Geoff. :wink:

Never question the eyesight of Mr Leamore, he has the X-Ray vision of a referee after all. :D

[Stu]

BTW, saw Leamore yesterday and passed on a Fanzine to him. I didn't see you at the match, in the Saddlers Club etc, but I still owe you the money for 3 copies. Will pay up next time I see you - OK?

No worries, I was running a bit late, as usual, and didn't get down for a beer... Hope they were a decent read...

[Whitti Steve]

How about the foul given against hector Sam in the corner ???

Yeah - what was that about - totally random.

[kevwill]

[Saddler4Life]

How about the foul given against hector Sam in the corner ???

Yeah - what was that about - totally random.

yes i no, was definately a foul on Hector Sam that was, we was going mental in the LF2G! Terrible Reffereeing IMHO!

[geoffwhiting]

As I said, final word, wasting time arguing over what I know I saw.

You seem to have had more comebacks than Sinatra on this one Geoff. :wink:

Never question the eyesight of Mr Leamore, he has the X-Ray vision of a referee after all. :D

But Leamore says he missed it. Well no surprises there, he's a lot older than me and has to get more sleep ! :lol:

[geoffwhiting]

BTW, saw Leamore yesterday and passed on a Fanzine to him. I didn't see you at the match, in the Saddlers Club etc, but I still owe you the money for 3 copies. Will pay up next time I see you - OK?

No worries, I was running a bit late, as usual, and didn't get down for a beer... Hope they were a decent read...

Excellent mate, well worth what I haven't paid you for 'em ! :lol:

[Exile]

Did you forget to pay? Another senior moment?
:wink:

[saddlerken]

How about the foul given against hector Sam in the corner ???

Yeah - what was that about - totally random.

yes i no, was definately a foul on Hector Sam that was, we was going mental in the LF2G! Terrible Reffereeing IMHO!

Was going to ask the referees on here on that one, totally ridiculous

[derbysaddler]

Looked like a spot on dive from upper floors2go with Wright. Otherwise he had a good debut, seems happy to have a shot and is a very busy player, causing plenty of problems upfront. Discipline could prove a problem with him though. Some Barnsley fans have said he will attempt to get himself sent off nearly every game.

A good performance overall. Not a great match in terms of quality, but the addition of Wright upfront seems so far to give us more presence upfront.

I didn't feel Keates had a good performance again.

[machew]

Awful referee. Seemingly having an anti-Walsall slant on too many of his decisions.

-The reaction from the Notts County centre half after one of the Tommy Wright challenges was to man handle TW right in front of the ref and not a word was even said.
-The Hector Sam incident in the corner ??? What the heck was that for ?
-The TW dive/no dive - either a free kick to us or a booking to TW for diving - he gave neither.
-Several free kicks against us that I had no idea of the offence, which seemed to be the reaction of the players.
-The County bench were almost on the pitch to bully the ref into decisions on several occasions. Not a word.

Is it an offence for a player to wear a shirt with no number on the back these days ? One of the County players played the first half 'anonimously' as I saw it. I'm no ref so I don't know what the rules are on this.

[sid swifty]

Well i wasn't there due to family commitments...but from the way its divided opinion on this site from all parts of the ground...and sometimes people sitting near each other had differing accounts...SO HOW THE HELL CAN ANYONE EXPECT THE REF TO GET IT RIGHT WHEN WE CANT AGREE ON UTS...EVEN AFTER DISCUSSING IT FOR 2 DAYS... :D