Good spot. Glad Eriksen pushed him away.Was Dawson going for his head here? That looked weird.
Good spot. Glad Eriksen pushed him away.Was Dawson going for his head here? That looked weird.
Totally agree mate. Just can't understand why so many think it was. The less said about the ABU media the better. I bet we suffer for a long time in regards to decisions after the scrutiny.Never a penalty. If a player gets a shot off and then gets hit after, it is never a penalty. In this case, it wasn't even the player who headed it who got hit. He's jumping out at the ball to make himself big. Never a penalty. If a player knocks it past him and is prevented from getting to his own touch, then it's a penalty. Never a penalty in that situation
I just love seeing a keeper coming for crosses and to be honest I love the occasional clattering of an opposition player as well in the process. We conceded countless opportunities and goals from having a keeper who was glued to his line at all times.
That looked like a goal to Shaw:
Yeah that was mint. So refreshing having a goalie being proactive and brave. The team has to FECKING MOVE for him though so we can utilise his passing strengths too.
They definitely have to move and trust him to find them with his passes.
That looked like a goal to Shaw:
Not sure what he was trying to do, but glad the other players intervened.Was Dawson going for his head here? That looked weird.
Yeah that was weird. I think the whole thing is going to take lots more drilling in training and a fair few matches before it really clicks. If we’re realistic, that shouldn’t be a shock to any of us.What I find puzzling was that Shaw was almost by the half-way line every time Onana had the ball - so we got crowded by 4 Wolves-players and we could only go central, right or long - because there was noone on the left to play to - made it so much easier for Wolves
That looked like a goal to Shaw:
24/36 passes (67%)
4/15 long balls (27%)
Thought he was good at this.
Do people know the fecking rules? The Wolves player had already headed the ball when Onana made contact, hence cannot be a penalty in a million years.
It’s so strange to se someone who doesn’t know the rules making fun about people who desn’t know the rules
I'm not making fun of anyone and have already explained my point in an additional post, so jog on and save the winking emojis for your online girlfriend.
The look on Shaw's face says it all reallyThat was a great moment. And something we wouldn't have seen with the previous incumbent.
‘Do people know the fecking rules?’ You wrote, and to me that sounds like ridiculing people who wrote that it should be a pen by the rules.
You demonstrated fairly clearly that you yourself don’t know the rules. Here are the rules:
Direct and indirect free kicks and penalty kicks can only be awarded for offences committed when the ball is in play.
1. Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
charges
jumps at
kicks or attempts to kick
pushes
strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
tackles or challenges
trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:
a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
holds an opponent
impedes an opponent with contact
bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object
The ball is obviously in play, Onana evidently jumps at and charges (even strikes, actually) an opponent in a clearly careless manner and that impedes the opponent (who topples over, the ball still in play). There is no exception to this dependent on where the ball is, as long as it is in play. At least not according to the rules.
You say you have explained your false knowledge elsewhere. However, your explanation draws on the things to consider not when assessing wether a free kick/penalty is to be given, but when assessing wether a red card should be given for denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity.
This is an ease enough mistake to make for a lay person, not everybody knows the rules of the game. If you don’t know the rules that well, you can admit to it, and maybe you should refrain from ‘do people know the fecking rules’. You can also say ‘oh, I didn’t know that’ as an alternative to ‘jog on etc’.
Yes, looking back to it I had indeed mixed up the red card and pen rules in the heat of the moment. I would like to apologise for my previous post as well, which was uncalled for.
That said, it's still not a penalty for me as Onana did not affect the Wolves player's ability to play the ball in the best possible way in that situation given the timing of the contact, which is practically what Ten Hag said after the game as well.
I think some of the rules are way too open for interpretation hence why we even have officials of the game calling almost identical incidents in a completely different way.
You have yesterday's officials and the ones in the VAR room thinking it's not a pen and the next morning they're dropped for the next round of fixtures with Moss saying it's a blatant pen. Obviously something's unclear not only for the average joes, but for the professionals too.
Anyway. We move on.
What is wierdThe build up wasn’t his fault, weird post
As I said he is clearly capable of better.He still looked more comfortable with the ball at his feet than DDG ever did. Even if it was just tapping it round the back. And we’ve already seen in pre-season he’s a level above on the ball. Don’t know why you’re so keen to be in denial about this? It’s quite obvious. There’s more than enough other reasons to be on a downer about last night anyway.
Totally agree mate. Just can't understand why so many think it was. The less said about the ABU media the better. I bet we suffer for a long time in regards to decisions after the scrutiny.
As I said he is clearly capable of better.
I am mostly remarking that the guys who said he would instantly change our attacking play are back tracking now. It was always an embarrassing view born out of the need for a scape goat post maguire.
I think it'll be an incremental improvement on our overall play that comes with downsides too.
Overall clearly there are bigger concerns from last night but I think onana will be a big talking point as the fans expectations were so high (unrealistically)
Fair point. Don't really agree that teams that press are our kryptonite... Feel like we have struggled against wolves type teams for years, and teams like Leeds who have tried to play high up the pitch have had terrible form against us. But I agree that wolves are negative, hard to play against and a goalkeeper isn't going to make any difference there.In terms of improving our attacking play that was always going to be most evident against teams that try to press us high up the pitch, our kryptonite. If we can pass our way through a press like that we can quickly create dangerous situations. Which will be a huge improvement on De Gea's panicky hoofs. Against teams happy to sit off us like Wolves last night I agree he will have little or no effect on our overall play. But in games like last night DDG was rarely a problem. He's happy enough when given loads of time and space on the ball.
I noticed this, I wonder if that was instructed by the manager or his own decision.
Frightens the life out of me personally, i really want to be where the majority of other posters are but he concerns me massively.
Time will tell but jury massively out for me.
That looked like a goal to Shaw:
That looked like a goal to Shaw:
That looked like a goal to Shaw: