themanupstairs

Also, we all know that this now means Colo's gan get himself sent off against Stoke. Wouldn't be NUFC if that didn't happen.

This would be very surprising. Basically they would be overruling a subjective decision.

IMO it would also be saying that it wasn't even a foul to begin with. Seen it a hundred times today and it is so clear that Fletcher runs into Coloccini first before Colo shifts any weight towards the mackem fanny.

Very surprised tbh.

 

Not sure why people are surprised. It was fairly obvious especially after actually reading the rules TCD posted on here.

 

As I mentioned previously, the FA usually go with the ref unless public opinion - as decided by whatever moron happens to be in the SkySports/MoTD studio (think Souness/Robbie Savage etc) - vehemently disagrees.

 

Actually re-examining an incident on its merits is the surprise for me!

Usually there's a lot of subjectivity that goes with the decisions, and they're usually revolving around serious foul play or intent to injure, spit or no spit, etc.. This was more cut and dry and all they had to do was take out the rule book and see a couple of replays.

 

 

Bunch of excuses? We were cheated out of the game. A football match lasts 90 minutes. Just because we didn't score before the red card doesn't mean we weren't clearly the better team. It was only a matter of time before we found a way through.

 

 

Aye, it does. It also continues after a red card.

 

Really f***ed off by how readily people have accepted a 3-0 shafting off such a w*** team just because of that one bad decision halfway through. We passed it about nicely for a while, whoopy f***ing do. In our position, and after five defeats in a row to this lot, the result was everything.

 

Exactly my point - it's a results business and whilst we are conceding an average of over just over two goals per game and scoring on average just over a goal a game then you're not staying up. He has had 10 games to stop this happening and it goes over the last 30 games also - how anyone can be saying there is progress just because the football is a little better just totally bewilders me.

Considering how bad the football was under the last two dickheads, some of the football we've seen in patches has been a LOT better. The main difference is that McClaren's approach can be sustainable should he find a way to make it work consistently. The previous mugs relied on individual brilliance and graft and nowt else. For me that;s the only reason I hope to see more progress under an admittedly uninspiring "vanilla" manager, because hey, we might actually enjoy the football again and get some decent results in the near future.

Very surprised tbh.

Not sure why people are surprised. It was fairly obvious especially after actually reading the rules TCD posted on here.

Goes without saying. Shocking decision from the ref.

 

Makes sense. Shame though. But appealing was always the right thing to do.

 

I thought we had no chance. If there's any debate they usually back the ref.

Pretty much no one in football thought it was a red apart from Madley and Andy Gray.

2 or 3 of the videos are genuinely funny imo.

Amish Paradise gets me every time, and I don't even know why

Looking at that list Daniel Agger is surely someone we should look at, PL experience and seems like someone who fights for the cause. Thought he was one of Liverpools better defenders in recent years, don't know if he's lost it or injuries got the better of him but I remember reading he only left because of Rodgers

Fantastic player but his injury record makes Woodgate look like an indestructible minotaur.

As s*** as Sunderland are, giving your opponents a one-goal, one-man advantage is effectively game over. So yeah, the game continued and we couldn't continue the domination but of course we couldn't. Everything that went on to happen happened because of that one moment.

 

We don't know for sure if we'd have went on to win, it's all guesswork, but I'd lean towards yes. Or at least a streak-busting draw.

 

exactly man, i've asked for some examples of teams coming back from a similar situation in a derby (any derby) and not heard any yet, i'd doubt there were many especially away from home

 

it just doesn't happen, yet accordingly to some we definitely should not have lost despite being absolute s**** for most of the season

 

i just don't see the point in whining and f***ing moaning about ashley and recruitment when we entered the game beforehand knowing how s**** that all was, the game turned on the decision and that's that...we still went at them to win and conceded a s**** second after missing a good chance to equalise

 

but that opinion is "weak" or whatever ron et al have dreamed up

 

Why should it being a derby make any difference? Not every team that goes 1-0 down and a man down ends up being thrashed, especially when playing such an awful side.

 

It happened at the weekend in Italy actually. Sassuolo conceded a penalty and lost a man against AC Milan in the first half. They then equalised midway through the second half before going on to lose 2-1 right at the end. This attitude of "the red card was game over" is pathetic given the state of the opposition.

 

Why should derbies, that are always considered 'different' games, be considered different games?

 

They're not different though. If we're treating it as such then we're at a handicap before kick off.

Which we didn't, and we dominated the game. The sending off galvanised them into believing they could get a result and then the derby side of things became important - to them.

 

As I said earlier we denied them and the crowd any hope or attempt to get into the game, the sending off changed that even though they didn't immediately play better as a result.

 

A sending off and penalty at Leicester away would not evoke the same reaction from the opposition as it does in a derby, this should surely be obvious.

All you need to do is listen to Fat Sam's post match verdict and look at his face as the goals flew in. He knew they were battered and should have been soundly beaten, and that a ridiculous refereeing decision had gifted them the game.

I don't see how they were lucky like, they took advantage of absolutely s**** defending. Any team will.

 

Even when they had a man advantage they never pushed forwards as it would allow our front 4 room. Just let us have the ball and waited for the obvious chances they would get.

You didn't think the penalty was lucky?

You didn't think the award of a ridiculous red card was lucky?

You didn't think that the worst player on the field getting injured in the first half so that he could be replaced with a genuine threat was lucky?

You didn't think that Clattercunt getting away with murder for 90 minutes was lucky.

 

All of these things went against us, mostly through no fault of our own.

Worst of the lot was the penalty that wasn't given for the clothesline on Wijnaldum.

As s*** as Sunderland are, giving your opponents a one-goal, one-man advantage is effectively game over. So yeah, the game continued and we couldn't keep up the domination but of course we couldn't. Everything that went on to happen happened because of that one moment, in some way.

 

So then why did we dominate possession after that and do absolutely nothing with it? The excuses and examples can't have it both way. You can't say the game was over because of the red card and then say that we dominated possession despite being down to 10 men. If anything it shows you just how terrible Sunderland are.

 

we made a great chance to equalise and it was missed then they got a scrappy, badly defended second and that was that

 

some people are acting like this was another pardew/carver showing and it simply wasn't

 

No they're not though. We're saying it's unaccaptable to lose 3-0 (AGAIN!) to a team that's that terrible, 10 men or not. You've just said yourself that the second goal was terrible defending...why is that being ignored as a main point in favour of 'dominating possession' and 'Mitrovic should have scored'...aye, but he didn't! I can't get my head around anyone looking at this result as anything other than an embarrassment. The excuses are even more embarrassing. We've such low standards man.

 

Because the embarrassment was the refereeing decision and the mitigating consequences not our overall performance like the recent past! That's all! Low standards? I don't see anyone here saying they were happy to lose 3-0 or even in the manner we lost. People are just furious for multiple reasons. You say that as if fans don't want NUFC to improve from top to bottom in every way.

 

So we have two opinions. What should one do if they thought this was an embarrassing result? Sulk and slag McClaren/Ashley/Charnley off on a message board? What about those with the opposite view? There's f***-all to be done about it whichever opinion you hold. All this sniping and having digs at each other is just needless and achieves absolutely nothing.

 

I don't see any sniping, I think the main point of contention is whether the team/club is excused from this result because of a terrible decision. Imo it's not, not even slightly. A 1-0 loss, or us having scored when we were dominating and I think they'd be excused, but we then conceded another goal that had nothing to do with us having 10 men and had one clear cut chance in the entire match against comfortably the worst team in the league. 10 men and a poor decision or not, that is completely unacceptable.

There's been plenty of sniping from other posters, but that's to be expected on a forum.

What if the result wasn't against Sunderland? Would you still be faulting the players for effort and the performance? Possibly the fact that it was the derby is adding to the significance, but end of the day it's another 3 points lost, and I'd still be fuming at the refereeing decision had it happened away to Bournemouth.

It was a freak result, there's no question in my mind about that.

Still think it should be Weird Al Mitrovic forever tbh. Can't remember who off here came up with that but it's spot on.

 

Forgive me, but what does this mean/what is the link?

Check out Weird Al Yankovic on a famous video site.

Weird Al Mitrovic

Here it is

As s*** as Sunderland are, giving your opponents a one-goal, one-man advantage is effectively game over. So yeah, the game continued and we couldn't keep up the domination but of course we couldn't. Everything that went on to happen happened because of that one moment, in some way.

 

So then why did we dominate possession after that and do absolutely nothing with it? The excuses and examples can't have it both way. You can't say the game was over because of the red card and then say that we dominated possession despite being down to 10 men. If anything it shows you just how terrible Sunderland are.

 

we made a great chance to equalise and it was missed then they got a scrappy, badly defended second and that was that

 

some people are acting like this was another pardew/carver showing and it simply wasn't

 

No they're not though. We're saying it's unaccaptable to lose 3-0 (AGAIN!) to a team that's that terrible, 10 men or not. You've just said yourself that the second goal was terrible defending...why is that being ignored as a main point in favour of 'dominating possession' and 'Mitrovic should have scored'...aye, but he didn't! I can't get my head around anyone looking at this result as anything other than an embarrassment. The excuses are even more embarrassing. We've such low standards man.

Because the embarrassment was the refereeing decision and the mitigating consequences not our overall performance like the recent past! That's all! Low standards? I don't see anyone here saying they were happy to lose 3-0 or even in the manner we lost. People are just furious for multiple reasons. You say that as if fans don't want NUFC to improve from top to bottom in every way.

So we have two opinions. What should one do if they thought this was an embarrassing result? Sulk and slag McClaren/Ashley/Charnley off on a message board? What about those with the opposite view? There's f***-all to be done about it whichever opinion you hold. All this sniping and having digs at each other is just needless and achieves absolutely nothing.

Still think it should be Weird Al Mitrovic forever tbh. Can't remember who off here came up with that but it's spot on.

However you spin it, wanking while thinking of Jack Colback is not a pleasant image.

john carver disagrees

So I wake up to news of "Newcastle sweat on injury to key man" only to find out Colback could be out for weeks. Are we sweating from rolling around laughing so much?

Reckon it' the sweat from wanking oneself silly

fucking hell she makes my stomach turn

Everything coming up yoan gouffran

What position, CB?

Yup.

A "couple of goal scoring chances" against the worst team in the division. Impressive.

 

We weren't anywhere near as good in the first half as people seem to think we were imo. A lot of the ball and very little genuine threat posed with it.

IMO it was a vast improvement on what we showed in any game we played against these under Pardew/Carver. We obviously went out to dictate the tempo and frustrate the home crowd to stop them from threatening our goal in the early exchanges. We succeeded at that and started to turn the screw and should have had a penalty before we got royally shafted by Madley.

I've seen Newcastle dominate a first half then come out for the second and look a complete shower of s*** hundreds of times, including several times this season. I've also seen the opposite where we improve dramatically after half time. That's football.

 

We got screwed by the referee, no question, but we should have made sure of being at least a goal to the good coming up to half time. Nobody's fault that we didn't other than ours. What if they'd made tactical changes at half time and improved? What would the excuse have been then?

 

Those are hypothetical questions man. We got shafted as you say, there's nothing more nothing less to it. Two major decisions went against us in the space of 30 seconds and that changed the game. We also controlled the tempo of the game with a man less and if Mitrovic puts it away we probably come away from this game with a point. Football is a game of details most of the time. We could've gotten battered by Sunderland in the 2nd half with 11 men, but I highly doubt that considering how the game was played even in the 2nd half. They scored on a flukey corner and then a counter attack when we were pushing men forward. Would people have been happier with 1-0 loss?

 

There's no way people can sit there and say that we were only passing it around whoopy doo (Dave..). We had couple of goal scoring chances that on our day easily goes in. We can't complain about the PERFORMANCE. Sure the result absolutely sucked, but we undeservedly lost.

 

We clearly aren't what we used to be 12-13 years ago, but our performances ahve been far better than what we've seen in the last 3 years or so.

Against one of the worst Sunlun sides I can remember who'd lost 2 players through injury.

 

This is another point for me. The last 6 defeats have come against comfortably the worst Sunderland side we've come up against. Arguably the best one that we played against was beaten 5-1. There's absolutely NO excuse like.

 

Course there's not, but there is for this individual game.

 

It's going around in circles like, my two finishing questions are as follows.

 

1. Can you point to any moment prior to the sending off when we had a clear cut chance at goal?

2. Do you think that pre Ashley/Pardew, a Newcastle team would have conceded a further two goals against that Sunderland team? Or would it have been more likely to fight back for a draw considering the possession we had?

1. Coloccini from a corner, Colback from Janmaat's lofted ball, and the blatant foul on Wijnaldum we should have had a penalty for.

2. Despite being down to 10, we probably had better chances to score in the second half. Sunderland were all over the shop at the back and let us in behind them time and time again. We didn't just wilt after the first half. Their second changed everything, and that;s the one gripe I have with our lot from this game. Leaving their man unmarked to volley the ball through a crowd of players was probably the one mistake we made the whole game.

any Americans or bundesliga watchers seen John Brooks play regularly and give an opinion? Think his contacts up this or next season and we've been linked before

Seen him for USMNTUVWXYZ last year. Massive imposing presence and good on the ball, but seemed to lack experience.

Come on lads, we didn't just pass it about. Pantilimon had to make a few decent saves throughout the 90 minutes, and not from pot-luck long range shots. It wasn't like we just passed it in front of them. Our finishing let us down, aye, but that's not to say we weren't dangerous in attack. The red card changed the match. There's no denying that. If it had been the reverse (mackems were very good and we were s***), and they got the red and we scored the penalty, we would still be complaining that the result flattered us as the sending off changed the momentum in our favor.

Too much of this is being linked to Ashley and the way he runs things etc... Why can't one be objective about individual incidents? 9 times out of 10 we would have been that shower of s**** the way we played. That is not even up for debate. Yeah obviously football doesn't always work that way, but by the same token, professional refs shouldn't be making such blatant mistakes that affect a match in this way.