Post match interviews v City (updated with full post match)
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 5:45 pm
http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboard/
http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=33624
Bit like you then!Devils_Advocate wrote:Moan, moan, moan.
if those key decisions were bad ones - and i will need to see them back - he's bound to focus on them like every manager in the land would.Devils_Advocate wrote:Moan, moan, moan. He's becoming more like Gordon Strachan all the time in his post match interviews
Nope I hardly ever moan as its not that important to me. I just have an opinion and try to form my opinion from an objective position which some of the obsessive fans on here struggle to comprehendLeisure wrote:Bit like you then!
Yeah, right!Devils_Advocate wrote:Nope I hardly ever moan as its not that important to me.
I dont think the Kompany challenge was a red and think Dyche would have bemoaned the ref just as much had Tarks got a red for a similar challenge.taio wrote:if those key decisions were bad ones - and i will need to see them back - he's bound to focus on them like every manager in the land would.
said on another thread I didn't think moss did a lot wrong but i didnt have a great view of the incidents and have yet to see replays. in terms of your so-called objectivity it's odd how far you try to take the opposite view. i agree you're consistent with it though, tiresomly soDevils_Advocate wrote:I dont think the Kompany challenge was a red and think Dyche would have bemoaned the ref just as much had Tarks got a red for a similar challenge.
He's also accusing an opposition player of Diving and Sane didnt look to dive for me and that is poor from Dyche
I agree with you that he's bound to focus on them and be biased like every other manager but I dott like it when other managers do it as dont most posters on here. Difference is my view is objective and consistant whilst others on here just seem to accept and defend it when it is Dyche
You're the first person that's claimed the Kompany challenge wasn't a red... well, I guess there's always oneDevils_Advocate wrote:I dont think the Kompany challenge was a red and think Dyche would have bemoaned the ref just as much had Tarks got a red for a similar challenge.
He's also accusing an opposition player of Diving and Sane didnt look to dive for me and that is poor from Dyche
I agree with you that he's bound to focus on them and be biased like every other manager but I dott like it when other managers do it as dont most posters on here. Difference is my view is objective and consistant whilst others on here just seem to accept and defend it when it is Dyche
Im positive I would be one of many had the foul been committed by Tarks on Mahrezfidelcastro wrote:You're the first person that's claimed the Kompany challenge wasn't a red... well, I guess there's always one
But it wasn't, so that's a complete irrelevance.Devils_Advocate wrote:Im positive I would be one of many had the foul been committed by Tarks on Mahrez
I dont try to take the opposite view. I have said im only 60-40 the ball didnt go out and id like to see better replays of it and ive said i suspect the linesman screwed up and it was probably offside. The reason I come across this way is because so many other people see it from the perspective of a supporter (which is fair enough) but im still gonna state my opinion takien from an objective stance. I find 4 things nearly always happen with my views on heretaio wrote:said on another thread I didn't think moss did a lot wrong but i didnt have a great view of the incidents and have yet to see replays. in terms of your so-called objectivity it's odd how far you try to take the opposite view. i agree you're consistent with it though, tiresomly so
Playing Devil's Advocate can be tiresome but it's an important part of being objective.taio wrote:said on another thread I didn't think moss did a lot wrong but i didnt have a great view of the incidents and have yet to see replays. in terms of your so-called objectivity it's odd how far you try to take the opposite view. i agree you're consistent with it though, tiresomly so
I agree with you it was not a red and the other way round we would all be up in arms.Devils_Advocate wrote:I dont try to take the opposite view. I have said im only 60-40 the ball didnt go out and id like to see better replays of it and ive said i suspect the linesman screwed up and it was probably offside. The reason I come across this way is because so many other people see it from the perspective of a supporter (which is fair enough) but im still gonna state my opinion takien from an objective stance. I find 4 things nearly always happen with my views on here
1 If i agree with a decision that is for Burnley pretty much everyone agrees with me
2 If i agree with a decision that goes for the opposition nearly everyone will disagree with me (and often have a go at me)
3 If i disagree with a decision that goes for Burnely nearly everyone will disagree with me (and often have a go at me)
4 If i disagree with a decision that goes for the opposition pretty much everyone agrees with me
There's a pattern to this and it isnt me always taking the opposite view
Hardly 'unconscious' on here. A large proportion of posters on these topics can be ignored as they just want decisions given to us whether it's right or wrong or what the laws say.watsonsclarets wrote:I agree with you it was not a red and the other way round we would all be up in arms.
Your view about fans perspective is spot on as well (unconscious bias).
I suspect you're right, but that would have been Burnley fans showing bias. I'm interested to understand what it was about Kompany's challenge that made you think it wasn't worthy of a red card, according to the laws of the game?Devils_Advocate wrote:Im positive I would be one of many had the foul been committed by Tarks on Mahrez
Fair question and id have to see it again to be certain. In my opinion the ball was bouncing at a funny height and Kompany lifted his foot to make contact to the ball. I think he more was waiting for the ball to come on to him than he was charging into the tackle. I think Lennon was quick to get inbetween Kompany and the ball and with his thigh got to the ball just ahead of Kompany leaving Kompanys boot to catch Lennon. I dont think Kompanys actions were dangerous or intentional and it was more a bit unfortunate ( a bit like when Vokes mashed up the Huddersfield players face last week) and so a yellow seems fair.Rileybobs wrote:I suspect you're right, but that would have been Burnley fans showing bias. I'm interested to understand what it was about Kompany's challenge that made you think it wasn't worthy of a red card, according to the laws of the game?
It wasn’t intentional but it was without a doubt dangerous. A gash closer to the groin than the knee would suggest the same.Devils_Advocate wrote:Fair question and id have to see it again to be certain. In my opinion the ball was bouncing at a funny height and Kompany lifted his foot to make contact to the ball. I think he more was waiting for the ball to come on to him than he was charging into the tackle. I think Lennon was quick to get inbetween Kompany and the ball and with his thigh got to the ball just ahead of Kompany leaving Kompanys boot to catch Lennon. I dont think Kompanys actions were dangerous or intentional and it was more a bit unfortunate ( a bit like when Vokes mashed up the Huddersfield players face last week) and so a yellow seems fair.
If i watch it back and Kompany is more aggressive with his challenge then i'll admit i might be wrong
But with that logic then the huddersfield players face being messed up would suggest Vokes challenge was dangerous and a red. I dont think it always follows that a bad challenge leads to a bad injury and vice versa so i think it needs to be the challenge that is judged. Fair enough if you disagree but at least youve been able to discuss it reasonably with meRileybobs wrote:It wasn’t intentional but it was without a doubt dangerous. A gash closer to the groin than the knee would suggest the same.
They changed the laws regarding a red card some time ago. It just has to be reckless to a red card, which it was by Kompany.Devils_Advocate wrote:But with that logic then the huddersfield players face being messed up would suggest Vokes challenge was dangerous and a red. I dont think it always follows that a bad challenge leads to a bad injury and vice versa so i think it needs to be the challenge that is judged. Fair enough if you disagree but at least youve been able to discuss it reasonably with me
If Vokes had been sent off then there couldn’t really have been any complaints. It would have been unfortunate, as it would for Kompany today as there was no intent to harm the opponent, but it is dangerous play nonetheless.Devils_Advocate wrote:But with that logic then the huddersfield players face being messed up would suggest Vokes challenge was dangerous and a red. I dont think it always follows that a bad challenge leads to a bad injury and vice versa so i think it needs to be the challenge that is judged. Fair enough if you disagree but at least youve been able to discuss it reasonably with me
And i dont think it was reckless though i'd like to see again as I am a lone voice on here more so than normal. Its ok to disagree and gave a different view of things though. Do you think Vokes swinging his elbow last week was reckless?Spijed wrote:They changed the laws regarding a red card some time ago. It just has to be reckless to a red card, which it was by Kompany.
I thought they were both yellows but im fine with your logic and if others thought the same I wouldnt be on here. It is the people who think Sams was just accidental and Kompanys was reckless but would have a completely different view if the rolews were reversed whose opinions I challenge and disagree withRileybobs wrote:If Vokes had been sent off then there couldn’t really have been any complaints. It would have been unfortunate, as it would for Kompany today as there was no intent to harm the opponent, but it is dangerous play nonetheless.
It doesn't matter. He made contact, studs first, with an opponents thigh-cum-knee, and did so in a challenge in which both players ended up on the deck. Its a red, and its the sort of tackle that Guardiola goes nuts about.Devils_Advocate wrote:Fair question and id have to see it again to be certain. In my opinion the ball was bouncing at a funny height and Kompany lifted his foot to make contact to the ball. I think he more was waiting for the ball to come on to him than he was charging into the tackle. I think Lennon was quick to get inbetween Kompany and the ball and with his thigh got to the ball just ahead of Kompany leaving Kompanys boot to catch Lennon. I dont think Kompanys actions were dangerous or intentional and it was more a bit unfortunate ( a bit like when Vokes mashed up the Huddersfield players face last week) and so a yellow seems fair.
If i watch it back and Kompany is more aggressive with his challenge then i'll admit i might be wrong
I'd say it was, especially when jumping like that.Devils_Advocate wrote:Do you think Vokes swinging his elbow last week was reckless?
What an absolutely dumb comment to make.Devils_Advocate wrote:Im positive I would be one of many had the foul been committed by Tarks on Mahrez
Fair enough we have different views but yours is consistent so no probs with meSpijed wrote:I'd say it was, especially when jumping like that.
As said i'd like to see it again as my recollection may be a bit off. But if noone has control of the ball and the ball is knee height and Kompany raises his foot to make contact and Lennon pushes his thigh onto the ball and they both make contact with each other I dont see that as a red. As Lennon got there first its our foul and as his boot was high it can be classed as dangerous as opposed to reckless so a yellow fair. If Kompany made movement towards the ball with his studs showing and was late resulting in catching Lennon then i'll think againclaretspice wrote:It doesn't matter. He made contact, studs first, with an opponents thigh-cum-knee, and did so in a challenge in which both players ended up on the deck. Its a red, and its the sort of tackle that Guardiola goes nuts about.
I think Dyche broadly calls the game about right in those interviews. Fair comments all round.
Kompany caught Lennon square with his studs. Theres a still photo of this on the club twitter feed. Whether hes late or not is then irrelevant- hes gone in for a tackle in a way that has the potential to cause injury. Hes been reckless as to the risk. Its almost the dictionary definition of reckless. The fact Lennon was able to get the ball without slamming his studs forward shows there was another way. If Kompany wasnt able to get close enough to address the ball the same way, he's lunging and shouldn't be making the tackle at all.Devils_Advocate wrote:As said i'd like to see it again as my recollection may be a bit off. But if noone has control of the ball and the ball is knee height and Kompany raises his foot to make contact and Lennon pushes his thigh onto the ball and they both make contact with each other I dont see that as a red. As Lennon got there first its our foul and as his boot was high it can be classed as dangerous as opposed to reckless so a yellow fair. If Kompany made movement towards the ball with his studs showing and was late resulting in catching Lennon then i'll think again
As for Dyche calling the game fair do you think it was fair for a manager to openly criticise an opposition player for diving when no way is it a clear dive and Dyche cant possibly k now for sure. How would you feel if the Huddersfield manager started labeling Vokes a violent thug in his post match press conference last week because he though Vokes intentionally elbowed his player
Great stuff cheers.Devils_Advocate wrote:Go and argue with Eddie TVC15 he's more on your level and will keep you out of trouble for a few days
The difference is that Ashley had got the ball first, Kompany didn'tDevils_Advocate wrote:Pic
The FA deem a reckless tackle to be a cautionable offence. For red it needs to be deemed serious foul playclaretspice wrote:. Hes been reckless as to the risk. Its almost the dictionary definition of reckless.
Devils_Advocate wrote:A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
You can end up with stitches in all sorts of situations. Endangering opponent means really endangering like breaking legs, smashing up someones knee or eye sockets or knocking people out. Pretty much all strong football challenges could endanger an opponent by your definition but this is talking about serious foul play and using excessive force.Spijed wrote:The fact that Lennon needed stitches (according to SD) would certainly fall into the 'endangering an opponent' category.
Haha - are you for real ?Devils_Advocate wrote:Endangering opponent means really endangering like breaking legs, smashing up someones knee or eye sockets or knocking people out.
I don't believe Dyche has said we'd have won if it hadn't have been for the 'decisions'.KRBFC wrote:Yawn Dyche, never his fault or the players, always the referee's fault when we don't win, booooooooooooring.