Guest neesy111 Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 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. This, considering how much of a shambles we are at the back we need to be even better than this as a minimum. Our priority should be defensively and not going forward because based on this season we'll have to score at least 3 goals to be within a chance of winning a game which is ridiculous. but you have to know that if we shut up shop we don't have the capabilities to win games on the break due to our shocking midfield and we'll just be dominated, much in the same way we dominated the mackems first half actually because they couldn't get out either We look our most dangerous on the counter attack tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 Against one of the worst Sunlun sides I can remember who'd lost 2 players through injury. Replaced with better ones off the bench. You're such a fucking weakling, man. Oh let's excuse another 3-0 defeat because they were forced to bring 2 'better' players on off the bench. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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 shite for most of the season i just don't see the point in whining and fucking moaning about ashley and recruitment when we entered the game beforehand knowing how shite that all was, the game turned on the decision and that's that...we still went at them to win and conceded a shite second after missing a good chance to equalise but that opinion is "weak" or whatever ron et al have dreamed up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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. Did we? It was soon half time. We kicked off the second half, had it for a few minutes then Mitrovic had this chance. That's about it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 but that opinion is "weak" or whatever ron et al have dreamed up As I've said, you make your own luck. We contribute to our own downfall when we don't take advantage of possession and we've got players on the pitch clearly not fit for purpose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 KI and others, are you taking into consideration how many players they had behind the ball? My observation when watching was that I've never seen them or us park the bus in a derby to that degree. They made no effort to get forward, except on a few occasions second half and the lead to the penalty incident. That makes even a shit team difficult to break down. I'm not saying it was good enough because it clearly wasn't in the end but we were getting there and were starting to open them up before the penalty and were by far the better side in the second half as well. My main/only complaint Colo-aside was the defending for the 2nd goal. No issues with the 3rd as we had to go gung ho and risk that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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 shite for most of the season i just don't see the point in whining and fucking moaning about ashley and recruitment when we entered the game beforehand knowing how shite that all was, the game turned on the decision and that's that...we still went at them to win and conceded a shite 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 Against one of the worst Sunlun sides I can remember who'd lost 2 players through injury. Replaced with better ones off the bench. You're such a fucking weakling, man. Oh let's excuse another 3-0 defeat because they were forced to bring 2 'better' players on off the bench. You're arrogant and ignorant. I never claimed that. You made your usual smug soundbite comment and I responded with one of my own. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 KI and others, are you taking into consideration how many players they had behind the ball? My observation when watching was that I've never seen them or us park the bus in a derby to that degree. They made no effort to get forward, except on a few occasions second half and the lead to the penalty incident. That makes even a shit team difficult to break down. I'm not saying it was good enough because it clearly wasn't in the end but we were getting there and were starting to open them up before the penalty and were by far the better side in the second half as well. My main/only complaint Colo-aside was the defending for the 2nd goal. No issues with the 3rd as we had to go gung ho and risk that. I didn't think they were particularly parking the bus in all honesty, especially before the sending off. I just thought they were absolutely crap and couldn't string any passes together. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 I disagree then, I'd have to watch it again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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 shite for most of the season i just don't see the point in whining and fucking moaning about ashley and recruitment when we entered the game beforehand knowing how shite that all was, the game turned on the decision and that's that...we still went at them to win and conceded a shite 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? I'd agree with what's being said if we shat ourselves and got battered to lose 3-0 but that simply didn't happen, we kept having a go and conceded a shite second and the rest is history. Keep hearing about "thrashings" or whatever but this wasn't a thrashing, everyone who watched the game knows it wasn't and repeating it doesn't make it so. It was a poor result on paper that didn't reflect the match at all. It happens. But I accept we've got recent poor history in the fixture and some people don't seem able to divorce the two, which is what I am able to do to some extent. Losing 3-0 is not acceptable and no-one has said it is but there is much more to it than us supposedly being thrashed and the refs two calls are a massive part of that, whether you like it or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 Not really arsed about the score tbh, our defence is shite and it could have been 3-0 even if we finished with 11 men. It's not like they took over the game, they carried on in the same fashion and were gifted another 2 goals. We didn't create much fair enough but I think we look fine going forward tbh and have done for weeks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 Sunderland benefitted hugely from the injuries to Toivanen and O'Shit. For one, there is no way on God's planet that Toivanen would have threaded that ball to Fletcher. It's ridiculously churlish to say that they weren't unbelievably lucky in every way on Sunday. Yes, the defending for the second was appalling but even down to Pantyliner having his usual good game against us compared with his charity the week before, everything went their way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 I don't see how they were lucky like, they took advantage of absolutely shite 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 I don't see how they were lucky like, they took advantage of absolutely shite 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 Can someone tell me what was lucky about their 2nd and 3rd goals? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 As shit 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 shite for most of the season i just don't see the point in whining and fucking moaning about ashley and recruitment when we entered the game beforehand knowing how shite that all was, the game turned on the decision and that's that...we still went at them to win and conceded a shite 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now