You cant have him covering the pass & Parker's run at goal.
----------
Deary me, Chicken. I thought we had explained this to you.
Scott Parker was not central to the goal was he? All Knight needs to do is run back maybe 30 yards and then gradually make his way over to Parker. That cuts off the pass whilst narrowing Parkers angle. It also holds up play for others to get back, like our full backs.
TheReebok,
So now you're predicting Parker's exact route to goal?
And not only can Knight mark Defoe but he can block off Parker's run & any potential pass to Defoe.
I wasn't aware Knight was so good.
You're not reading this properly chicken.
If Parker runs directly to goal, he will have to go toward Knight, won't he? Because he is to the left of the goal, his angle isn't great for him to have a shot.
Knight can let Parker come towards him whilst marking Defoe. It's really quite simple.
It's called good positioning really. Knight just needs to stand in between the 2 players and kills 2 birds with one stone, because Parker would have to do well to score from the corner of the penalty box.
TheReebok
And you dont think Defoe & Parker are good enough or clever enough to split & leave Knight with just one option to either cover the shot or the pass.
If Parker runs from the wing towards the goal, Knight has to stand inbetween parker & the goal. If this happens, i would imagine Defoe would pull back to say, the penalty spot, or even the 6 yard box where he has a simple tap in. And if Knight covers the pass from Parker to Defoe (on the penalty spot) then Parker has a free shot at goal. Either way, its an obvious goal scoring opportunity.
Do you honestly think Defoe & Parker would have run at the same pace, completely square to eachother, in a kind of "piggy in the middle" shape with Knight being the piggy all the way to the final yard?
chicken, you are having to assume far too much for it to be an obvious goalscoring oppertunity.
Moses,
If "TheReebok" can assume Knight is good enough to defuse a 2 on 1 siuation with ease, then i think its fair for me to assume it would have been a goal scoring opportunity.
I reckon if you asked 100 football fans what the outcome would be from a 2-on-1 situation, involving Knight versus Defoe & Parker, the majority would say it would end up in a goal, or at least an attempt on goal.
Again, Chicken, you're missing the point.
If Knight can get himself back in between Parker and Defoe and force Parker to have a shot, on his left foot, from the corner of the penalty box, then for me, it isn't an obvious goalscoring opportunity.
There was still plenty ground for Parker to cover and Knight, strangely, is in a good position to at least get a block or an interception in.
It ain't obvious, and that's the whole point
TheReebok,
Again, Chicken, you're missing the point.
If Knight can get himself back in between Parker and Defoe
================================
No fella, you are missing my point. Defoe isn't stupid enough to simply keep up with play & allow a situation whereby Parker has no option but to shoot on his weaker left foot, from the edge of the box.
All Defoe needed to have done was, allowed Parker to run slightly ahead of him in the final 20 yards, then Knight would have to leave the whole area gaping, with just Defoe in the box, with no way of Knight getting a block in.
As i say, i wasn't aware Knight was such a good defender that he can block a shot, whilst also blocking a backwards pass, like 10 yards infront of him.
I'm now baffled as to how Bolton have conceded so many goals with someone like him.
I can't believe this is still raging.
It's simple for me. The use of the word OBVIOUS implies the referee must think it is CERTAIN the player is going to go on and make a goal attempt.
No way could the referee feel certain, not at 50 yards from goal, on the flanks, The only way certainty could be achieved with an attacking player in that position is if all of the remaining 9 Bolton outfield players were in the Tottenham box
Spurs fans, you know 'Arry, out of whose bottom the sun doth shine?
He turned to Coyle when it happened and said "I can't believe that's happened to you."
In 30 years of watching football I have never seen a sending off anything like that one before. It was just a gaffe. Lets have a group hug.
largehat -
In 30 years of watching football I have never seen a sending off anything like that one before. It was just a gaffe. Lets have a group hug.
====================================
I'm all up for a group hug but i have seen far worse sendings off than that one, as in more dubious. And thats just in the last year or so, let-alone the last 30 years.
So we have all agreed that it wasnt obvious then?
Attwell made the right decision. What was Cahill doing?
comment by Diamond Lights (U3483) posted 10 minutes ago
Attwell made the right decision. What was Cahill doing?
--------------------------------
Trying his best to get a new contract?
Very detailed analysis from the incident by Gary Neville on Sky Sports 1 just now. He went on and on about how he thought Scott Parker was likely to have a goal scoring opportunity because Knight was flat footed and Parker was away, and his last touch had sent the ball in the direction of the goal. Then in summing up he said Stuart Attwell doesn't deserve all the stick he has received, but it was a yellow card offence.
largehat,
Sounds like Neville was contradicting himself a bit there doesn't it?
Do you know what, I was expecting him to approve the red card, the way his analysis was going. He started off by sayng, "I am going to be controversial here",and said what I have mentioned above, and then right at the end he gave the "yellow" verdict. I posted about it because I thought it was pretty telling that there was a pundit who analysed it from the referee's point of view but still thought it was a yellow.
I hated Gary Neville as a player, but he has totally surprised me as a pundit. He has a great insight into the game, I have to admit. He makes points about players that none of the BBC gravy train mob make, and he's 10 times better than Andy Gray.
largehat
I agree (not necessarily with the yellow verdict ) but about Neville. Rated him highly as a player but thought he would make a terrible, boring & biased pundit - but he's the opposite. When he commentates on a match, he sums up situations very well & his knowledge of the game, like player positioning (not just defenders) is spot on. He really impresses me.
Woohoo!
Cahill to score against his former team on saturday!
COYWM!
It's one of those ones when a yellow's not enough but a red's too much.
Russell,
It's one of those ones when a yellow's not enough but a red's too much.
================================
I remember when they were actually looking to bring in an "orange card" for exactly the scenario you mention.
Not sure how that would work though, as you still need another card to get sent off - but i definitely remember a discussion about it.
Congratulatios to Cahill for winning the appeal though.
Sign in if you want to comment
The sending off
Page 5 of 5
posted on 5/12/11
You cant have him covering the pass & Parker's run at goal.
----------
Deary me, Chicken. I thought we had explained this to you.
Scott Parker was not central to the goal was he? All Knight needs to do is run back maybe 30 yards and then gradually make his way over to Parker. That cuts off the pass whilst narrowing Parkers angle. It also holds up play for others to get back, like our full backs.
posted on 5/12/11
TheReebok,
So now you're predicting Parker's exact route to goal?
And not only can Knight mark Defoe but he can block off Parker's run & any potential pass to Defoe.
I wasn't aware Knight was so good.
posted on 5/12/11
You're not reading this properly chicken.
If Parker runs directly to goal, he will have to go toward Knight, won't he? Because he is to the left of the goal, his angle isn't great for him to have a shot.
Knight can let Parker come towards him whilst marking Defoe. It's really quite simple.
It's called good positioning really. Knight just needs to stand in between the 2 players and kills 2 birds with one stone, because Parker would have to do well to score from the corner of the penalty box.
posted on 5/12/11
TheReebok
And you dont think Defoe & Parker are good enough or clever enough to split & leave Knight with just one option to either cover the shot or the pass.
If Parker runs from the wing towards the goal, Knight has to stand inbetween parker & the goal. If this happens, i would imagine Defoe would pull back to say, the penalty spot, or even the 6 yard box where he has a simple tap in. And if Knight covers the pass from Parker to Defoe (on the penalty spot) then Parker has a free shot at goal. Either way, its an obvious goal scoring opportunity.
Do you honestly think Defoe & Parker would have run at the same pace, completely square to eachother, in a kind of "piggy in the middle" shape with Knight being the piggy all the way to the final yard?
posted on 5/12/11
chicken, you are having to assume far too much for it to be an obvious goalscoring oppertunity.
posted on 5/12/11
Moses,
If "TheReebok" can assume Knight is good enough to defuse a 2 on 1 siuation with ease, then i think its fair for me to assume it would have been a goal scoring opportunity.
I reckon if you asked 100 football fans what the outcome would be from a 2-on-1 situation, involving Knight versus Defoe & Parker, the majority would say it would end up in a goal, or at least an attempt on goal.
posted on 5/12/11
Again, Chicken, you're missing the point.
If Knight can get himself back in between Parker and Defoe and force Parker to have a shot, on his left foot, from the corner of the penalty box, then for me, it isn't an obvious goalscoring opportunity.
There was still plenty ground for Parker to cover and Knight, strangely, is in a good position to at least get a block or an interception in.
It ain't obvious, and that's the whole point
posted on 5/12/11
TheReebok,
Again, Chicken, you're missing the point.
If Knight can get himself back in between Parker and Defoe
================================
No fella, you are missing my point. Defoe isn't stupid enough to simply keep up with play & allow a situation whereby Parker has no option but to shoot on his weaker left foot, from the edge of the box.
All Defoe needed to have done was, allowed Parker to run slightly ahead of him in the final 20 yards, then Knight would have to leave the whole area gaping, with just Defoe in the box, with no way of Knight getting a block in.
As i say, i wasn't aware Knight was such a good defender that he can block a shot, whilst also blocking a backwards pass, like 10 yards infront of him.
I'm now baffled as to how Bolton have conceded so many goals with someone like him.
posted on 5/12/11
I can't believe this is still raging.
It's simple for me. The use of the word OBVIOUS implies the referee must think it is CERTAIN the player is going to go on and make a goal attempt.
No way could the referee feel certain, not at 50 yards from goal, on the flanks, The only way certainty could be achieved with an attacking player in that position is if all of the remaining 9 Bolton outfield players were in the Tottenham box
Spurs fans, you know 'Arry, out of whose bottom the sun doth shine?
He turned to Coyle when it happened and said "I can't believe that's happened to you."
In 30 years of watching football I have never seen a sending off anything like that one before. It was just a gaffe. Lets have a group hug.
posted on 5/12/11
largehat -
In 30 years of watching football I have never seen a sending off anything like that one before. It was just a gaffe. Lets have a group hug.
====================================
I'm all up for a group hug but i have seen far worse sendings off than that one, as in more dubious. And thats just in the last year or so, let-alone the last 30 years.
posted on 5/12/11
So we have all agreed that it wasnt obvious then?
posted on 5/12/11
Attwell made the right decision. What was Cahill doing?
posted on 5/12/11
<<----- This
posted on 5/12/11
posted on 5/12/11
comment by Diamond Lights (U3483) posted 10 minutes ago
Attwell made the right decision. What was Cahill doing?
--------------------------------
Trying his best to get a new contract?
posted on 5/12/11
Very detailed analysis from the incident by Gary Neville on Sky Sports 1 just now. He went on and on about how he thought Scott Parker was likely to have a goal scoring opportunity because Knight was flat footed and Parker was away, and his last touch had sent the ball in the direction of the goal. Then in summing up he said Stuart Attwell doesn't deserve all the stick he has received, but it was a yellow card offence.
posted on 6/12/11
largehat,
Sounds like Neville was contradicting himself a bit there doesn't it?
posted on 6/12/11
Do you know what, I was expecting him to approve the red card, the way his analysis was going. He started off by sayng, "I am going to be controversial here",and said what I have mentioned above, and then right at the end he gave the "yellow" verdict. I posted about it because I thought it was pretty telling that there was a pundit who analysed it from the referee's point of view but still thought it was a yellow.
I hated Gary Neville as a player, but he has totally surprised me as a pundit. He has a great insight into the game, I have to admit. He makes points about players that none of the BBC gravy train mob make, and he's 10 times better than Andy Gray.
posted on 6/12/11
largehat
I agree (not necessarily with the yellow verdict ) but about Neville. Rated him highly as a player but thought he would make a terrible, boring & biased pundit - but he's the opposite. When he commentates on a match, he sums up situations very well & his knowledge of the game, like player positioning (not just defenders) is spot on. He really impresses me.
posted on 6/12/11
Appeal won. Case closed.
posted on 6/12/11
Woohoo!
Cahill to score against his former team on saturday!
COYWM!
posted on 8/12/11
It's one of those ones when a yellow's not enough but a red's too much.
posted on 8/12/11
Russell,
It's one of those ones when a yellow's not enough but a red's too much.
================================
I remember when they were actually looking to bring in an "orange card" for exactly the scenario you mention.
Not sure how that would work though, as you still need another card to get sent off - but i definitely remember a discussion about it.
Congratulatios to Cahill for winning the appeal though.
Page 5 of 5