Robert Madley 3-0 Newcastle - 25/10/15 - Post match reaction from Half Time

[Interpolic]

I disagree then, I'd have to watch it again.

[mrmojorisin75]

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.

[Hanshithispantz]

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.

 

[Incognito]

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.

 

[Hanshithispantz]

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.

[Incognito]

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.

 

[themanupstairs]

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.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Can someone tell me what was lucky about their 2nd and 3rd goals?

[Wullie]

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.

[Incognito]

Can someone tell me what was lucky about their 2nd and 3rd goals?

2nd was just rank bad defending, 3rd was just a counter attack, and to be fair, a very good one. But the first set the agenda for the game. Even had he given the pen, which in my opinion he should not have, but not sent off Coloccini, which should have happened, then I still maintain we'd not have lost that game. I appreciate it's hypothetical but that's just my thoughts.

[triggs]

Can someone tell me what was lucky about their 2nd and 3rd goals?

The 2nd was shit defending and goalkeeping. The 3rd was a typical goal that is scored when the other team is throwing everyone forward. The problem with that was that although we were throwing everyone forward we weren't creating much. Mitrovic's chance was a fluke the way it came to him and the Wijnaldum shot although a decent shot was from an angle that would have been incredibly difficult to score from

[mrmojorisin75]

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.

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.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I think we were spot-on in our approach TBH, I was amazed how well it was going before 'the incident'.

[Ankles Bennett]

Its quite a damning indictment of Madely that Mourinho is currently having to answer an FA charge for comments he made regarding the officiating prowess of Madely in the Chelsea Southampton game.

 

This bloke is quite clearly a one man refereeing disaster zone and he needs to be dropped from all EPL games immediately.

[Wullie]

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.

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.

 

Leicester are better so we'll probably end up spanked 5-0.

[themanupstairs]

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.

[Guest ElCid]

 

 

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.

[themanupstairs]

 

 

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.

[Guest ElCid]

 

 

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.

 

The football is slightly better - a lot better nope can't agree with that. I just can't see any progress sorry and until we start seeing goals being stopped going in by the bucketful at one end and consistently scored at the other which is the main role of any coach, then you are continually struggling. McClaren is under the same bracket as the other two and this club will never progress until the cretins in charge of the club change their ways and we all know that ain't going to happen.

[themanupstairs]

 

 

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.

 

The football is slightly better - a lot better nope can't agree with that. I just can't see any progress sorry and until we start seeing goals being stopped going in by the bucketful at one end and consistently scored at the other which is the main role of any coach, then you are continually struggling. McClaren is under the same bracket as the other two and this club will never progress until the cretins in charge of the club change their ways and we all know that ain't going to happen.

 

I stand corrected. Our attacking and approach play is a lot better. Our defending not so much (individually nor collectively). However, I can't agree that McClaren is of the same non-pedigree as Pardew the charlatan or Carver the useless try-hard. He's far more "decorated" as a coach, and has far more experience than these two morons.

[ujpest doza]

The second goal had absolutely nothing to do with us chasing the game or only having 10 men. Just rank bad defending from a basic set piece.

 

True, I thought that at the time TBF. Well worked corner as well.

At which Dummett and another defender were clearly blocked off/obstructed from trying to charge down the shot from M'Vila.

 

[Guest ElCid]

 

 

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.

 

The football is slightly better - a lot better nope can't agree with that. I just can't see any progress sorry and until we start seeing goals being stopped going in by the bucketful at one end and consistently scored at the other which is the main role of any coach, then you are continually struggling. McClaren is under the same bracket as the other two and this club will never progress until the cretins in charge of the club change their ways and we all know that ain't going to happen.

 

I stand corrected. Our attacking and approach play is a lot better. Our defending not so much (individually nor collectively). However, I can't agree that McClaren is of the same non-pedigree as Pardew the charlatan or Carver the useless try-hard. He's far more "decorated" as a coach, and has far more experience than these two morons.

 

That's you're opinion fine as I said mine is he is a very poor manager and fully deserves to be included within the level of the other two. Apart from one game we have actually only scored 6 goals in 9 games and even including that game only 12 in 10 games so he is not doing any better at all either in results, goals scored and goals conceded than the other 2 clowns. His last four jobs sacked by Derby (a Championship club), sacked within 9 months at Wolfsburg and resigned before he was sacked in the other 2 jobs at Forest and Twente - sorry you can say as much as you want the bloke is not a good manager and never will be in a month of Sundays.

[timeEd32]

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 s*** 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.

 

I think it was a combination of the two. They were definitely sitting back, and I suppose hoping to catch us on the counter with some long, direct play, but they could not get out of their own end. Some absolutely atrocious passing. Honestly, it was up there with the worst 45 minutes I've seen from a team in a long time. A minute later we were trailing 1-0 and down a man. An hour later we had lost 3-0. I'd probably laugh if it wasn't so fucking infuriating.

[sempuki]

We've admitted failing to control players in the mackem game.

[DJ_NUFC]

We've admitted failing to control players in the mackem game.

 

Thank fuck, the defence was a shambles.