This season:- P18 W6 D6 L6 F26 A28 Points 25
Last season: P18 W7 D4 L7 F24 A30 Points 25

And that's after the bad start last season. I wonder how far up the table they would have been with Sam from the start of the season. It's ok though as they are trying to play entertaining football! They have certainly been entertained today.

Very poor defence Definately a game we can win

I've not seen Marco Silva's fan club on here for a while. I presume he's serving a ban?

conceding 6 at home !!! how bloody embarrassing.

Commy wrote:This season:- P18 W6 D6 L6 F26 A28 Points 25
Last season: P18 W7 D4 L7 F24 A30 Points 25

And that's after the bad start last season. I wonder how far up the table they would have been with Sam from the start of the season. It's ok though as they are trying to play entertaining football! They have certainly been entertained today.

24 points this season, not 25.

You can't go off that game. Yes Everton looked poor at the back but then again they were playing one of the leagues best attacking teams. Tottenham were ruthless once they scored..and they missed several chances before they did. If we attack them we stand a good chance but it's not something we are exactly known to do...sadly.

Was Pickford shite....as usual?

Makes our result v Spurs amazing in context

Some saying we can win. I really hope so but unfortunately we dont have a midfield as good as Evertons and we certainky dont have their scoring capability. But. Here's hoping and I am looking forward to this. Hope Barnes starts with Vokes.

Interesting to see that Everton had a goal disallowed because of a push in the back ----well it was almost a push in the back as far as I could see. It was very similar to the push in the back on Kevin Long yesterday except that, according to one official one incident was a foul but the other was not ---depending of course if one team came from London or not.

Steve1956 wrote:Was Pickford shite....as usual?

Certainly was for the 3rd goal (or it could have been the 4th, I lost count after the 2nd!).

Leisure wrote:Certainly was for the 3rd goal (or it could have been the 4th, I lost count after the 2nd!).

Overrated Midget!

Spurs deffo turned it on today, it might have been different if Calvert Lewins goal would have stood, which it should have, but hopefully their heads will still be down come boxing day, having said that they did look ordinary and i dont think we have much to fear from them, we have had 2 decent performances of late and if we keep that up i think 3 points from the toffees is on the cards.

Steve1956 wrote:Overrated Midget!

He's the same height as Heaton

I fear a backlash.

Dont think Mr Southgate would have been impressed by Prickford today, this might open the door for Hart and Pope

moaninclaret wrote:Dont think Mr Southgate would have been impressed by Prickford today, this might open the door for Hart and Pope

Aye Pope who hasn't played a game for months and Hart who has let the most goals in this season.

How many did Pickford let in?

moaninclaret wrote:How many did Pickford let in?

Less than Hart during the season.

Or perhaps McCarthy or a ereturn for Foster?

moaninclaret wrote:How many did Pickford let in?

We have conceded 36 Goals to Everton's 28.

This result could have a demoralising impact on Everton or then again they might end up being like a wounded beast . Either way - I hope we can make the most of it. A 6-2 hammering at home sure is a beating at any level.

Will the Cricket Field sing England's England's number four England's number four ?

ClaretAndJew wrote:We have conceded 36 Goals to Everton's 28.

Jeez C&J can you not let up for a bloody minute ...
Its Christmas ffs

Bosscat wrote:Jeez C&J can you not let up for a bloody minute ...
Its Christmas ffs

Don't let facts ruin your Christmas mate.

Commy wrote:This season:- P18 W6 D6 L6 F26 A28 Points 25
Last season: P18 W7 D4 L7 F24 A30 Points 25

And that's after the bad start last season. I wonder how far up the table they would have been with Sam from the start of the season. It's ok though as they are trying to play entertaining football! They have certainly been entertained today.

Interesting comparison. Just shows how trying to win games keeps the supporters on side.

The best comparison is how they played at Anfield this season versus last season. I’m sure the Everton fans will be much happier with what they are seeing this season. However, it will be interesting to see how quick the fans turn if we send them home from the turf with their tails between their legs.

ClaretAndJew wrote:Don't let facts ruin your Christmas mate.

Don't let facts get in the way of your hatred either .... and I am not your mate ...

Bosscat wrote:Don't let facts get in the way of your hatred either .... and I am not your mate ...

Awww and here I was in the process of writing you a lovely Christmas card.

The Everton fans are over the moon with the style of football they play now.
Wasn't the best idea to not have any defensive midfielders in against Spurs though.
They were rampant at times.

ClaretAndJew wrote:He's the same height as Heaton

He just looks like a midget then

moaninclaret wrote:Dont think Mr Southgate would have been impressed by Prickford today, this might open the door for Hart and Pope

It won't!

How the hell Pickford was still on the pitch is another of those baffling decisions that cannot be excused even by incompetence.

Absolutely shocking.

To be fair I think spurs would have rolled anyone over yesterday, Son was pretty much unplayable and very good to watch. Although playing such a high line with no pressure on the ball is suicide stuff against players like that.

Pickford is the new David James. Pulls off spectacular saves and looks brilliant most of the time but seems to have a regular calamity in him.

Wile E Coyote wrote:conceding 6 at home !!! how bloody embarrassing.

You’ve gone and bloody jinxed it now...

According to Sky stats Joe has faced and saved the most shots in the Prem Pickford pushing the ball into Alles path for goal no 2 was vintage Lee Grant.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:Interesting to see that Everton had a goal disallowed because of a push in the back ----well it was almost a push in the back as far as I could see. It was very similar to the push in the back on Kevin Long yesterday except that, according to one official one incident was a foul but the other was not ---depending of course if one team came from London or not.

Or more precisely one team is Arsenal. Just been reading their fans comments on the Guradian site. Tlak priveliged soft snowflake fans. Hoho. They have them. Calling Barnes all kinds of things and Dyche but none condemning their players divibg. Hope they dont win another game all season and cant wait for tgem to come up here.

Regarding pushing. How many times do we see a defender wrestle a player to ground in the box and nothing is given? The forward does it its a foul
Basically the referees for whatever reason are not consistent and I for one am fed up of it

JohnMac wrote:How the hell Pickford was still on the pitch is another of those baffling decisions that cannot be excused even by incompetence.

Absolutely shocking.

Inexplicable, the most blatant red card you will see and didn't even get punished by a yellow. Alli did his England pal a favour by not overreacting. That would have seen Pickford ruled out against us although with the mistakes he's capable of I'm not sure whether that would be a good thing.

And some really do believe Pickford has the ability to become a world class goalkeeper.

Oh well.

Rileybobs wrote:Inexplicable, the most blatant red card you will see and didn't even get punished by a yellow. Alli did his England pal a favour by not overreacting. That would have seen Pickford ruled out against us although with the mistakes he's capable of I'm not sure whether that would be a good thing.

Sorry Rileybobs ---there was no foul committed because Alli was offside and the flag had gone up, therefore, the first offence was offside.
What actually happened was something which I have said would happen with the interpretation of the Offside Law these days where the flag does not go up immediately. The AR could not flag until Alli started his challenge for the ball, by which time Pickford had to be making a challenge. He caught Alli whilst making the challenge and it could well have resulted in a penalty and a card, although it would have had to have been yellow because he was making a genuine challenge for the ball. The first offence committed though was offside, therefore, that is what was penalised and no card or blame could be given to Pickford because the whistle was blown as he was making his challenge.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:Sorry Rileybobs ---there was no foul committed because Alli was offside and the flag had gone up, therefore, the first offence was offside.
What actually happened was something which I have said would happen with the interpretation of the Offside Law these days where the flag does not go up immediately. The AR could not flag until Alli started his challenge for the ball, by which time Pickford had to be making a challenge. He caught Alli whilst making the challenge and it could well have resulted in a penalty and a card, although it would have had to have been yellow because he was making a genuine challenge for the ball. The first offence committed though was offside, therefore, that is what was penalised and no card or blame could be given to Pickford because the whistle was blown as he was making his challenge.

Can a player not be punished for dangerous play when play has stopped? Seems like a bizarre law if not. Pickford could have broken Alli's leg with his reckless lunge.

As I said, the whole incident was caused by the interpretation of the Offisde Law which is now in existence. Had Alli been given offside, which he was, straight away when the ball was played, Pickford would not even have challenged for the ball, however, because the AR had to wait for Alli to actually move forward onto the ball before he could flag, Pickford had to go for the ball because he did not know that Alli was offside. The whole scenario meant that Pickford did not commit any offence at all and should not be punished.

You would have to be really doing something stupid to get punishment for something happening after play has stopped ---perhaps wrestling on the floor such as Barnes and Sokratis were doing at The Emirates --mind youm it was worth noting that, in spite of two players being involved, only one managed to receive a caution!

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:As I said, the whole incident was caused by the interpretation of the Offisde Law which is now in existence. Had Alli been given offside, which he was, straight away when the ball was played, Pickford would not even have challenged for the ball, however, because the AR had to wait for Alli to actually move forward onto the ball before he could flag, Pickford had to go for the ball because he did not know that Alli was offside. The whole scenario meant that Pickford did not commit any offence at all and should not be punished.

You would have to be really doing something stupid to get punishment for something happening after play has stopped ---perhaps wrestling on the floor such as Barnes and Sokratis were doing at The Emirates --mind youm it was worth noting that, in spite of two players being involved, only one managed to receive a caution!

I understand that, the offside law creates confusion. But are you saying that a player can’t be punished for endangering another player when play is stopped?

Everton is a team we can beat and who we have a good recent record against. Under Dyche we have generally been well prepared for our Christmas outings.
Andre Gomes went off injured and Walcott was struggling in the second half with a knock.
I think if we get proper stuck in like we did against Liverpool - retaining our discipline of course - then we can make it very uncomfortable for them. It’s Barnes and Vokes up top for me (but really anyone but Wood at the minute, he looks so bereft of confidence).

Rileybobs wrote:I understand that, the offside law creates confusion. But are you saying that a player can’t be punished for endangering another player when play is stopped?

In this particular case, Pickford was entitled to go for the ball and did nothing wrong, it could be argued that Alli should have stopped because he was offside, however, he didn't , because he had not been blown up for offside, therefore, he coud expect to be tackled.
The ball was dead because of the offside and Pickford committed no offence whatsoever.
Don't get me started about the new things like reckless, out of control and endangering an opponent ---all things being introduced to sanitise the game and get rid of all physical content.
The game has gone soft, hence why we are even talking about the Alli/Pickford incident which was an absolutely 'nothing' incident and probably would not have even happened in days gone by because Alli would have been given offside much quicker and Pickford would not have had to do anything. Yet, it is the officials who fans criticise, even though they were doing their job using the new interpretation as directed.
What would you have said if Alli had gone for the ball and stamped on Pickford, which would have been quite easy to do? The decision would still have been offside and Alli could not be held to blame in trying to play the ball.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:In this particular case, Pickford was entitled to go for the ball and did nothing wrong, it could be argued that Alli should have stopped because he was offside, however, he didn't , because he had not been blown up for offside, therefore, he coud expect to be tackled.
The ball was dead because of the offside and Pickford committed no offence whatsoever.
Don't get me started about the new things like reckless, out of control and endangering an opponent ---all things being introduced to sanitise the game and get rid of all physical content.
The game has gone soft, hence why we are even talking about the Alli/Pickford incident which was an absolutely 'nothing' incident and probably would not have even happened in days gone by because Alli would have been given offside much quicker and Pickford would not have had to do anything. Yet, it is the officials who fans criticise, even though they were doing their job using the new interpretation as directed.
What would you have said if Alli had gone for the ball and stamped on Pickford, which would have been quite easy to do? The decision would still have been offside and Alli could not be held to blame in trying to play the ball.

Again, I’m in agreement with you on the game becoming sanitised but I don’t think it’s necessarily a poorer spectacle for it.

As a former referee you clearly understand the laws of the game better than me so I’m not disputing that you are correct, I just fail to understand why a player can’t be punished for endangering another player when play has stopped. They can be sent of for violent conduct in the same scenario so why not dangerous play?

And as sanitised as the game has become, if you don’t think that Pickford’s two-footed lunge that connected square on with Alli’s shin was dangerous then perhaps you are yearning for a game that has long since gone.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:In this particular case, Pickford was entitled to go for the ball and did nothing wrong, it could be argued that Alli should have stopped because he was offside, however, he didn't , because he had not been blown up for offside, therefore, he coud expect to be tackled.
The ball was dead because of the offside and Pickford committed no offence whatsoever.
Don't get me started about the new things like reckless, out of control and endangering an opponent ---all things being introduced to sanitise the game and get rid of all physical content.
The game has gone soft, hence why we are even talking about the Alli/Pickford incident which was an absolutely 'nothing' incident and probably would not have even happened in days gone by because Alli would have been given offside much quicker and Pickford would not have had to do anything. Yet, it is the officials who fans criticise, even though they were doing their job using the new interpretation as directed.
What would you have said if Alli had gone for the ball and stamped on Pickford, which would have been quite easy to do? The decision would still have been offside and Alli could not be held to blame in trying to play the ball.

I'm not a former referee, but I'm pretty sure you are not correct. Sorry. I'm not disagreeing in principle about whether or not the game has gone soft; bit specifically, if any player launches a reckless/dangerous tackle that is worthy of a red card in the referee's opinion, the fact that he may have blown his whistle to stop play before the tackle comes in, makes no difference at all. I'm not saying Pickford's tackle was that bad, but if the ref had thought it was, then he would have been off.

Pickford couldn't have been sent off or booked for preventing a goalscoring opportunity, because he didn't. But he could be booked or sent off for a bad tackle.

[duplicate]

As I explained previously, Pickford had every right to go for the ball in the circumstances and, had there been no offside given, it is possible that a penalty would have been given and a yellow card issued. The offside made it a dead ball and Pickford did not commit an offence because he was committed to go for the ball in the circumstances. It was not violent conduct, it was just an honest attempt by a goalkeeper to win the ball and prevent a goal.
As I said, in past times, Alli would have been given offside earlier and the whole scenario would not have arisen.

Having seen Van Dijk cautioned in a Champions League game just over one week ago for an absolutely wonderful tackle when he won the ball fair and square but then his opponent carried on running and was hit on the ankle and rolled around on the floor and the referee, who had allowed play to go on, then stopped play and gave a free kick because possibly someone on the sideline had a different opinion, perhaps I am yearning for a game which still allows physical contact and defenders who are able to tackle.
I was so pleased to witness that the player rolling around on the floor, who was so badly damaged by this legal tackle, managed to get up and complete the game.even though there was about one hour to play when the incident happened.

Anyway, Alli was offside, Pickford did not commit any offence, the officials got it right and Alli was injured. No big deal in the end, just something which happens in a football match anywhere in the world at all levels but there is no fuss made when all there is watching are the managers, 20 people and a dog.

dsr wrote:I'm not a former referee, but I'm pretty sure you are not correct. Sorry. I'm not disagreeing in principle about whether or not the game has gone soft; bit specifically, if any player launches a reckless/dangerous tackle that is worthy of a red card in the referee's opinion, the fact that he may have blown his whistle to stop play before the tackle comes in, makes no difference at all. I'm not saying Pickford's tackle was that bad, but if the ref had thought it was, then he would have been off.

Pickford couldn't have been sent off or booked for preventing a goalscoring opportunity, because he didn't. But he could be booked or sent off for a bad tackle.

Offside offence was the first offence, however, because the decision had not been made, Pickford had to go for the ball and it would have been to prevent a goalscoring opportunity. He was entitled to go for it with his feet or would you rather he dived in head first, been kicked in the head and carried off, thus leaving the officials to decide whether Alli was guilty of an offence? As I have said, because they have messed about with the interpretation of offside that much, this scenario was just waiting to happen and I can see a keeper being seriously injured at some stage because of this interpretation.
Alli walked off the field without any problem at half time except for a slightly strained hamstring which saw him sidelined for the second half.
The officials saw nothing wrong so why punish a player for doing nothing. Referee's decision, however, when they introduce VAR they can have more and more opinions and more discussions by pundits who are all part of the media sterilisation of football campaign.