Observation on their second goal.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Looking at that still I'd instinctively say Andrew is the one poorly positioned. If he's roughly in line with the other defenders, Townsend is offside. EDIT - forget what I just said. Was looking at the second still that dickos posted which is well after the ball is played.

I get BST's point completely. You could have a forward standing offside all game like this, and as long as the ball is cut back or played square they can score. It makes it very difficult for defenders, but maybe that's why they've done it, like introducing the backpass rule and 3 points for a win?

Pib.

Agreed.
Andrew is the one defender who's not switched on.

My take on the current law and interpretation is that you couldn't really set out to game it in this way. What happened on Sunday is a rare example of an odd situation developing and Meyer has cleverly games it at the time.

Fair play to him. But the law shouldn't be allowing that sort of goal.

[VivaRovers]

BST, I'm not sure how understanding football's rules make my approach to the game 'legalistic'. You've clearly made your mind up that this is some great travesty against the art of defending, but I can't agree. I think the law is fine. And I say that as someone who plays centre-half.

I'll leave you to shout into the ether.

[pib]

Despite our dodgy defensive set-up and Meyer standing in a position that makes it really difficult to stop him scoring, you have to say it is a really well-worked goal.

That ball over the top by Milivojevic and the timing of the run plus the composure from Townsend was effectively the difference in quality between the two sides. Rovers had many similar positions and if we'd had the ability/composure to do that it would've been a very different game. That's the difference between first-tier and third-tier quality I suppose.

[BillyStubbsTears]

We were saying on Sunday that a really noticeable gulf between the sides was the accuracy of those balls over the defensive line. Very impressive. As was the vision and movement from Townsend in that goal.

Tiny moments but it's a yawning chasm in basic quality.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Viva
I was referring to your almost Thatcher-esque" "There's no such thing as the spirit of the law" pronouncement. Having read your excellent work over many years, I'm sure you don't REALLY think that.

As a centre half, how would you have dealt with that scenario?

[Bentley Bullet]

The

We were saying on Sunday that a really noticeable gulf between the sides was the accuracy of those balls over the defensive line. Very impressive. As was the vision and movement from Townsend in that goal.

Tiny moments but it's a yawning chasm in basic quality.

They think quicker, anticipate quicker and react quicker.

[dickos1]

If you think it’s text book defending for centre halves to charge down a midfielder, leaving the striker you’re marking and your own full backs behind you then you’re crackers

[dickos1]

Phew.

It'd help if folk actually looked at the video and saw what led to that position emerging.

When Townsend laid the ball back to Milivojevic, the immediate danger was someone advancing towards the box and letting fly.

Downing and Anderson did Defence101 there. They, together, pressed up to the edge of the box to compress that space.

Textbook defending.

The reason the back line is slightly askew is that Andrew barely moved as they pressed and Coppinger moved very slowly.

Go and look at the video. Look at around 03:20 here.
https://highlightsfootball.com/video/doncaster-rovers-vs-crystal-palace-highlights/

Now, RA and Dickos are saying that the centre halves should have held a line somewhere closer to the penalty spot, because of the position that Meyer had taken up. But that would have left a yawning gap between the defensive line and the midfielders, which is criminal defending. That would have invited Schlupp or van Aanholt to run into that gap, or Milivojevic to step forward and shoot. You simply do not defend like that. No one does. No defenders in professional football would have responded to that emerging situation by prioritising Meyer stood 5-6 yards in front of where the natural defensive line was.

So, I'll say again. Meyer took up an offside position that no one could defend against without breaking fundamental tenets of defending. Which is why he was offside in the spirit of the law.

If you disagree, explain, with reference to that video, what the alternative defending would have been that wouldn't also have led to a very big advantage for Palace.

Nobody is suggesting they should’ve prioritised Meyer, but it isn’t the centre halves job to close down a midfielder 30 yards from goal.

[VivaRovers]

Viva
I was referring to your almost Thatcher-esque" "There's no such thing as the spirit of the law" pronouncement.

Sorry BST, but you can absolutely f**k off in deeming anything I write or do as Thatcher-esque. Even Ben Thatcher.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Viva
I was referring to your almost Thatcher-esque" "There's no such thing as the spirit of the law" pronouncement.

Sorry BST, but you can absolutely f**k off in deeming anything I write or do as Thatcher-esque. Even Ben Thatcher.

I thought that might provoke a response! Withdrawn M'Lud.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Dickos.

You've lost me mate. But then that's inevitable if you take my comments on the centre halves pressing a line on the edge of the box as meaning that they they were charging down a midfielder 30 yards from goal.

If you insist on misinterpreting what folk say, there's not much chance of sensible conclusions emerging.

Go back and read what I actually said. Discussions tend to work best when folk do that instead of responding to what they want someone to have said.

[turnbull for england]

The

We were saying on Sunday that a really noticeable gulf between the sides was the accuracy of those balls over the defensive line. Very impressive. As was the vision and movement from Townsend in that goal.

Tiny moments but it's a yawning chasm in basic quality.

They think quicker, anticipate quicker and react quicker.

Thats what we noticed , our crossfield passes that on Saturday will  set the team off on a break , were nearly always cut out . Not so much because they were off target , more the defenders were just  reading  and positioning that bit better. Despite all that I stil think with little more luck we could have got a result and bodes really well for rest of season

[BillyStubbsTears]

Turnbull.

Bob on. Its not that Palace were streets ahead of us in fitness, strength, competitiveness, even technique.

It's the fact that they rarely made wrong choices at critical moments. I was extremely impressed with that. It serves as a standard for some of our players.

And at the risk of sounding heretical, I think it shows why Coppinger never made it to the highest level. He's had ability to match anyone. But for most of his career, his decision-making didn't match that ability.

I think that side of his game has improved immeasurably this past few years. If he'd had that as a 26 year old, I suspect we would have the legend to look back on because he'd have been off-ski to the top level.

[dickos1]

Billy
None of your defence of our defending for that goal makes any sense.
Anderson and cowling shouldn’t have been where they were that’s a fact, they left batsuai behind them and onside, regardless of Meyer.
Your full backs should never be deeper than your centre halves, they will be probably watching the video now and being told that

[IDM]

IMHO it is only important for the coaches and players to review incidents like this to learn and to improve.

Regardless of differing views of our defenders’ positioning and movement, it’s a simple and basic fact that Palace’s players have a better speed of thought, spacial awareness, footballing nous etc - that’s why they are in the premier league and ours are not.

We can analyse till the cows come home to see how we could have done better, and we can accept the opposition was just better than us.

I would rather see a discussion on the merits of our 3rd or 4th goal vs Scunthorpe after next Saturday’s game..

[pib]

I think it's Downing (or maybe Anderson) who's position looks about right in that still. Defending just inside the 18 yard line. If the other centre half, Andrew and Blair had been in line, and Copps had pushed up further we'd probably have been alright. I don't think you could push up much further than that though or it would leave a quick player like Townsend enough space to time an onside run and get in behind.

Interesting seeing that anyway. It's rare we have so many angles of Rovers games to look at (probably for the best tbh. I wouldn't want to go through the nauseating Sky-esque microscopic analysis every week). Just shows how small subtle details can swing a game though. If we'd got to HT at 0-1 I feel like we'd still have been in with a shout. The second goal gave them a nice cushion to just sit on and see through the 2nd half.

[foxbat]

I agree with that . watching the 'highlights' after on MOTD , you could see the look on Roy Hogson's face as he celebrated the 2nd goal that said ' Game Over '.
Pity , really , second half might have gone better.