Chris Wood (now playing for Nottingham Forest)

[thomas]

if anything the VARccine deniers should only be surprised the monied interests in the sport took this long to be fed up with duff human officiating and seek better alternatives.

 

edit: to be clear for the slow kids, I'm not even saying VAR is necessarily better. I'm saying it's them seeking better.

 

 

Edited April 13, 2022 by thomas

[Groundhog63]

Did VAR not pick up the fact Rudiger scored from a corner that wasn't a corner?

[The College Dropout]

Tbf I don't mind the handball rule. When a ball strikes the hand in the lead up to a goal, it often helps the player "control" the ball before shooting / passing. Even if totally unintentional.

[Shearergol]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

Tbf I don't mind the handball rule. When a ball strikes the hand in the lead up to a goal, it often helps the player "control" the ball before shooting / passing. Even if totally unintentional.

 

But on the flip side, an accidental handball can prevent a goal too. Should that be a penalty every time then?

[Guest neesy111]

It's ridiculous you can have a seperate rule for when the incident leads up to a goal.

 

Either all handballs are penalised or back to the old rules.

[RodneyCisse]

Can we update chris’ name on the thread title for the Woods lot?

[The College Dropout]

37 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

But on the flip side, an accidental handball can prevent a goal too. Should that be a penalty every time then?

That's easier to force. You can kick the ball towards someone's hand or your hand can be to your body and still hit your hand when attempting a block. Not a like for like example.

 

Even if it's not intentional, if your hands are away from your body and you block a goal bound shot with your hand - yeh it's a penalty . That's always been a penalty.

[Shearergol]

31 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

That's easier to force. You can kick the ball towards someone's hand or your hand can be to your body and still hit your hand when attempting a block. Not a like for like example.

 

Even if it's not intentional, if your hands are away from your body and you block a goal bound shot with your hand - yeh it's a penalty . That's always been a penalty.

 

So what if a striker is stood with his hands to his body, a defender kicks the ball at him attempting to clear, it hits his hand and he's able to then score? That's your like-for-like example. What then?

[The College Dropout]

36 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

So what if a striker is stood with his hands to his body, a defender kicks the ball at him attempting to clear, it hits his hand and he's able to then score? That's your like-for-like example. What then?

Well no because defending is not attacking so it’s not like for like.  
 

Using your body to block the ball is a part of defending. If your arms are to your body and hits your arm. No that’s not a penalty.  
 

Using your hand to control footballs is not a part of attacking. 

[Shearergol]

13 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Well no because defending is not attacking so it’s not like for like.  
 

Using your body to block the ball is a part of defending. If your arms are to your body and hits your arm. No that’s not a penalty.  
 

Using your hand to control footballs is not a part of attacking. 

 

That's completely not what I said. 

[TheInfiniteOdyssey]

[Barnes23]

Love that 

 

Reminded me of this gem from Florian Lejeune a few years back: 

 

[Kid Icarus]

[Lazarus]

9 hours ago, Barnes23 said:

Love that 

 

Reminded me of this gem from Florian Lejeune a few years back: 

 

 

Quote

Drive out to sea then put it on a boat.

 

[huss9]

yesterday was his least effective game for us ( a polite way of putting it).

think howe has to go with willock or gayle instead of Wood against palace.

 

 

Edited April 18, 2022 by huss9

[Fantail Breeze]

Quicker this lad is flogged to some awful team like Stoke in the Championship the better. Would be disastrous if he was considered any kind of option next year, we’d have to hope he’s never needed.

 

Suppose we’ll get a few duds like this and the cash isn’t an issue anymore, but crazy to think anyone thought he’d ever be effective.

[TRC]

Hes done his job as far as I'm concerned. Give the guy a break, we are staying up he will be 3rd choice next year and seems like a good guy. 

[Bintang]

He has done his job. He was brought in to help keep us up and he has done. 

 

I hope he isnt here next year and we have far better forwards, but for now he has done what he was meant to do. 

[toontownman]

I'm fine with him being 4th choice next year (3rd if we are really restricted in spending). We need a world class striker in and an exciting young-un ideally.

 

He seems a good lad. I don't mind him sticking around for another year. That said if someone will pay 15m for him or more, I'd shift.

[Lenny]

8 hours ago, Fantail Breeze said:

Quicker this lad is flogged to some awful team like Stoke in the Championship the better. Would be disastrous if he was considered any kind of option next year, we’d have to hope he’s never needed.

 

Suppose we’ll get a few duds like this and the cash isn’t an issue anymore, but crazy to think anyone thought he’d ever be effective.

There are a number of players at the club currently that either shouldn't or can't be "flogged" at the first opportunity, for various reasons, and should be demoted to a squad player as we look to improve in the immediate future. Wood is one of those players.

 

I'm not a fan of his, at all in fact, but calling his use under the conditions we hope are the case next season disastrous is pretty negligent of context. It stands to reason that bringing a single squad player in at any one time, to an organised, quality team will likely result in improved performance from them given that they have better players surrounding them than what we're seeing now. Wood will be given that chance, and if he doesn't fulfil it, he'll rightfully be moved on.

 

Wood may well be ineffective for us a times (a lot of the time), but equally, what are we doing to accommodate his strengths, or any centre forward's strengths for that matter? We're hardly putting chance after chance on a plate for him. The reality of our squad is that whilst the effort and organisation has improved immeasurably, the lack of quality across the pitch is still hugely evident; we're largely getting by on unbelievable team spirit and wave of momentum.  I'd expect that when we have more than just ASM that can create something, we'll see more chances afforded to the striker(s).

[Dr Jinx]

He's a 25 million Daryl Murphy/Sibierski hybrid. Good lad though and he's won us points since coming here. Very happy to have him as one of 4 options for next season.

 

Next season it would be nice if he was the option to bring on if we're trying to see a game out etc..

[GeordieDazzler]

I have no doubts he’ll score when presented with chances but his lack of pace means he’s rarely getting in those positions. He’s under no illusions as to the situation and think he’s just enjoying his 6 months playing in front of a massive crowd. 
 

Functionally we operate better as a team with a CF and he has filled that gap, we overpaid but it was a means to an end and if as appears likely we have avoided relegation then it’s clearly been a price worth paying. 
 

Club has been smart with the 2.5 year deal, he’ll be 3rd/4th choice next season and he knows that, but at lest he won’t end up here in perpetuity like Clark etc who should have been moved on after they’d achieved promotion and survival. 

[andyc35i]

He’s a far better 3rd choice option than Dwight Gayle in my opinion. Let’s hope we get that top level striker in with Wilson and Wood coming off the bench

[WillingtonMag]

Think he will score tomorrow night me.

[80]

4 as an attacker, 7 in defence. But we didn't buy him as a defender...