Anthony Gordon

[NSG]

Whether or not it was a pen, it was still absolutely fucking ridiculous from their keeper and I’d be absolutely fuming at him if I was a Brentford fan.

 

Absolutely no need to even give the ref a decision to make.

[Guest]

Think Shearer v Tim Howard at Old Trafford was close to being the same as Gordon yesterday. That day we didn't get the pen but Durkin came out afterwards saying he got it wrong after watching it back. 

[Gawalls]

38 minutes ago, GeordieDazzler said:

If a player is shepherding the ball out of play and you go through the back of them it’s a foul. Same concept here, got his body between keeper and ball and got fouled. 

Go through the back of them is harsh though - his knee grazed Gordon’s thigh but we had a perfectly good goal disallowed so that’s that.

[Coffee_Johnny]

I thought he settled well on the right yesterday. His level of performance was as we have seen, dare I say are coming to except from him, on the left.
 

I also thought Barnes was beginning to find his groove on the left. I know the standard patter is having more than one option is a good problem to have, but part of our winning momentum last season—and perhaps for all effective teams—is having a settled team who ‘just know’ what each other are going to do; where there teammates are going to be. 

I wonder whether there is a way to add Miggy to the mix? His linkage with Tripps and Bruno is a great example of that tacit ‘just knowing’ which creates so many problems for opponents.  

[loki679]

3 minutes ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

I wonder whether there is a way to add Miggy to the mix? His linkage with Tripps and Bruno is a great example of that tacit ‘just knowing’ which creates so many problems for opponents.  

 

Just let Gordon develop that understanding with them on the right. Love Miggy but having someone there with two feet would be a big upgrade. 

[Paully]

He’s absolutely quality this lad - a shithouse but our shithouse!

[Holloway]

Huge season ahead for him, pace ,vision and versatility in spades

[Guest]

The chalked off goal and the penalty summed up the refs performance, he generally give freekicks for non fouls and then didn't give freekicks for fouls. 

If VAR looked at every decision he made throughout the whole 90 mins I'm not sure he would have got half of them correct .

 

Goal should have stood and not a pen. Tit for tat 

[Cronky]

1 hour ago, CPL said:

It was definitely clever play by Gordon and if another top 6 team got that, we would be fuming. 

 

We will take it though. 

 

Realistically, a very large proportion of free kicks or pens are awarded through an attacker deliberately positioning himself so that a defender makes contact. The way our game is refereed, there is some responsibility on the defender not to be suckered into challenges where they don't get the ball. 

 

The issue of whether the contact is enough to cause a player to go down is a tricky one. We can't expect players to fight to stay on their feet, when the consequences of that temporary loss of balance or footwork is to lose the ball. 

 

I'm not sure whether the ball was still on the field when the foul was committed. Given that the whole of the ball has to have crossed the line, it probably was. But I'm not clear on what the correct decision would have been if the ball had crossed the line. Googling hasn't helped. Any refs out there?

[jack j]

8 hours ago, Jordan said:

Bruno’s today was pathetically immature. Didn’t get the foul he wanted so 10 seconds later goes and kicks the guy in front of the ref. 

I'd be looking at the incompetence of the referee more than bruno. If he'd give the blatant foul to start with he wouldn't have had to come back and make the necessary foul to get the yellow anyway. The foul needed to be made as well because they'd split our midfield

[CPL]

1 hour ago, Cronky said:

 

Realistically, a very large proportion of free kicks or pens are awarded through an attacker deliberately positioning himself so that a defender makes contact. 

Disagree with this part. I think most fouls are giving when the defender mistimes the tackle coming across the attackers line and missing the ball.

 

I take your point though. The most recent example that comes to mind is when Jiminez ran through last year against Pope after a dodgy touch. That was more a penalty than yesterday despite him leaning in to make sure there was contact. 

[Bondedcrown]

3 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The ball was still in play, and the GK tackles Gordon without playing the ball nor getting anywhere near it.  Pretty much as obvious a foul as you’ll ever see

Exactly! you can tell who has never played 11 aside football at any level by the replies!

[Heron]

9 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Agree with this fully.  The goal should’ve stood. Wilson didn’t do enough for it to be a foul.  
 

 

The second penalty was an awful decision too. 

Haven't seen the second one yet like but seemed harsh to me if it was given from in the ground. But I used to play CB so perhaps there's a defensive bias there...

[Geordie_once_removed]

The problem is not with the player or the referee. It's the rule. It's clearly a foul even if you might argue Gordon did draw it. But the foul and the position it was in in no way justify a free kick at goal from 12 yards. At best Gordon keeps the ball in play and is able to make his way towards the corner flag and maybe send in a cross. A penalty is just not a proportionate response to a foul that prevents that.

 

I'd like two degrees of foul in the penalty area. One results in a traditional penalty. The other in an ice hockey style penalty.

[STM]

It was a foul in the box. It's a pen, it's always been a pen.

 

Brentford were dirty cunts and got what they deserved.

[davidnolan13]

29 minutes ago, Geordie_once_removed said:

The problem is not with the player or the referee. It's the rule. It's clearly a foul even if you might argue Gordon did draw it. But the foul and the position it was in in no way justify a free kick at goal from 12 yards. At best Gordon keeps the ball in play and is able to make his way towards the corner flag and maybe send in a cross. A penalty is just not a proportionate response to a foul that prevents that.

 

I'd like two degrees of foul in the penalty area. One results in a traditional penalty. The other in an ice hockey style penalty.

fuck me dont give refs extra rules to fuck up, they can barely manage the ones they have now.

[Geordie_once_removed]

53 minutes ago, STM said:

It was a foul in the box. It's a pen, it's always been a pen.

 

Brentford were dirty cunts and got what they deserved.

Agree this this. Overall they got what they deserved 

[M1tche]

12 hours ago, Jordan said:

Bruno’s today was pathetically immature. Didn’t get the foul he wanted so 10 seconds later goes and kicks the guy in front of the ref. 

I've had a few of them over the years, something you just feel like you're getting nothing, and just want to kick someone because of it. Pure frustration.

[Tisd09]

1 hour ago, STM said:

It was a foul in the box. It's a pen, it's always been a pen.

 

Brentford were dirty cunts and got what they deserved.

This for me. 

 

I loathe the one in the box where a player gets a shot away but the defender catches the attacker late, anywhere else on the pitch a free kick is given for a late challenge, in the box it's deemed ok because the player got the shot away. 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2023 by Tisd09

[M1tche]

5 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The ball was still in play, and the GK tackles Gordon without playing the ball nor getting anywhere near it.  Pretty much as obvious a foul as you’ll ever see

I have no idea how anyone is suggesting it anything other than a pen, saying he bought it or its "clever" suggest its borderline. For me it's as stonewall as it gets.

[Fezzle]

4 minutes ago, M1tche said:

I have no idea how anyone is suggesting it anything other than a pen, saying he bought it or its "clever" suggest its borderline. For me it's as stonewall as it gets.

Agreed, the second one was a joke mind but common sense eventually overruled but this was obvious. Keeper is a total idiot for making it happen 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, M1tche said:

I have no idea how anyone is suggesting it anything other than a pen, saying he bought it or its "clever" suggest its borderline. For me it's as stonewall as it gets.

 

Without the keeper being where he was and diving in, Gordon has a chance to control the ball under less pressure and keep possession. 

 

Gordon gets to the ball before the keeper and does the only thing he can do in that situation. Foul and penalty.

[The College Dropout]

Gordon has no intention of getting the ball. He’s trying to get a pen. 
 

Even Shearer admitted it was super soft.  I’ll take it. But that’s one that’s gone in our favour. 

[Jackie Broon]

22 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Gordon has no intention of getting the ball. He’s trying to get a pen. 
 

Even Shearer admitted it was super soft.  I’ll take it. But that’s one that’s gone in our favour. 

 

Watch it from here in slow motion, the keeper is committed and lunges to get the ball but Gordon gets there first, it's not like he's just standing there and Gordon runs into him  https://youtu.be/eRI6MZmQSlg?t=491 The way he turns his body is to be able to keep the ball in, if he doesn't turn like that he could only kick it out of play or back heel it straight to the keeper. he doesn't get the chance to because the keeper takes him out.

 

 

Edited September 17, 2023 by Jackie Broon

[The College Dropout]

There’s no changing my opinion. Gordon is looking for a penalty. He engineers the contact.  Gk falls for it.  Ref falls for it. 
 

if it happened against us I’d be fuming. I’d also be disappointed that the GK have the ref a decision.