0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
JonathanAgreed (nearly) 100%. I'd only seen the push with the right hand initially. That Twitter video clearly shows some movement of their lad's left elbow (not a punch but that doesn't matter) towards Rowe's chin. If Rowe was feigning contact, it's brilliant acting because the jerk of his head times perfectly with when the elbow is close to his face. Looks to me like he's clipped Rowe and credit to Rowe for not chucking himself to the ground and writhing in agony. It didn't look like a very nasty swing of the elbow and any contact was minimal, but I agree if you do that, you're inviting a red card. Could just as easily have been a yellow, but the red wouldn't be rescinded on appeal with that video as evidence, so they can't have any complaints.
I was convinced it was an uppercut watching it live, it was obviously the follow up elbow, either way its red
How odd that after the sending off their manager left the right back spot wide open. A Stockport player went to have words with the manager presumably about that, the way he was pointing only for the manager to push him and give him an earfull
A soft red card for me. No complaint at the officials as they were correct under the letter of the law. But if that's a sending off then the laws an ass.I agree that Tomlin was outstanding.However I thought Rovers were relatively poor against the 10 men. The game didn't have the feel of a 4 or 5-1 at all for me but of a team making heavy weather of taking advantage of their numerical advantage. 2 reasons for this.Firstly we were too slow in putting a second centre forward on. This should have been done immediately after their equalizer IMO. Miller was isolated and barely had a kick in the final 3rd in the first half hour of the 2nd half.Secondly everything went through Clayton who for me was poor. He dwelt too long on the ball, slowed things down too much, eschewed playing quick passes to spread the play for simpler ones to the centre backs or to players tightly marked who could only play back to him. He made it easy for Stockport to organize themselves.The 1st goal was created by Anderson playing an excellent yet simple and relatively risk free forward pass to the flank. Clayton failed to make any such contributions all game. Hence otherwise, with everything going through Clayton albeit very slowly, Rovers created no serious chances from our possession play v 10 men (instead 3 long shots Tomlin x2, Biggins; 2 from set pieces Anderson, near og; Rowe' chance after a possession turnover; Agards miss from Rowe's deep cross)The winning goal came about because Stockport having been so disciplined in the 2nd half collectively lost their heads, pushed too many men forward and thankfully the ball fell to Tomlin who capped a virtuoso performance with an excellent run and through ball to Agard. Nothing to do with our possession play.
Quote from: Branton Red on August 17, 2022, 09:32:08 pmA soft red card for me. No complaint at the officials as they were correct under the letter of the law. But if that's a sending off then the laws an ass.I agree that Tomlin was outstanding.However I thought Rovers were relatively poor against the 10 men. The game didn't have the feel of a 4 or 5-1 at all for me but of a team making heavy weather of taking advantage of their numerical advantage. 2 reasons for this.Firstly we were too slow in putting a second centre forward on. This should have been done immediately after their equalizer IMO. Miller was isolated and barely had a kick in the final 3rd in the first half hour of the 2nd half.Secondly everything went through Clayton who for me was poor. He dwelt too long on the ball, slowed things down too much, eschewed playing quick passes to spread the play for simpler ones to the centre backs or to players tightly marked who could only play back to him. He made it easy for Stockport to organize themselves.The 1st goal was created by Anderson playing an excellent yet simple and relatively risk free forward pass to the flank. Clayton failed to make any such contributions all game. Hence otherwise, with everything going through Clayton albeit very slowly, Rovers created no serious chances from our possession play v 10 men (instead 3 long shots Tomlin x2, Biggins; 2 from set pieces Anderson, near og; Rowe' chance after a possession turnover; Agards miss from Rowe's deep cross)The winning goal came about because Stockport having been so disciplined in the 2nd half collectively lost their heads, pushed too many men forward and thankfully the ball fell to Tomlin who capped a virtuoso performance with an excellent run and through ball to Agard. Nothing to do with our possession play.I also agree that Tomlin was outstanding. Completely disagree with everything else though, your take on the game is totally baffling to me. Poor finishing and good/fortunate goalkeeping were the only things that kept that game tight, in my opinion.
Rovers played for 70 minutes against 10 men engaged in blanket defence.The best way to combat these tactics is to keep the ball and keep spreading the play. Rovers did this. But to open your opponents up and create chances you also need to be, where possible, incisive and change the point of attack quickly. Rovers didn't do this.After, say an attack down the right faltered, and the ball came back to the midfield Rovers were not quick enough in moving the ball say to the left to take advantage of the Stockport defence moving to counter the prior move down the right.We were simply too slow in midfield when the ball needed recycling. This allowed Stockport time to reorganize themselves ahead of the next attacking phase occurring.Other than the 1st goal in 70 minutes of near continual possession football Rovers therefore did not cut open and create a single good chance through possession play against 10 men. Not one.Yes we created other chances through set pieces, long range shots and possession turnovers etc.As the playmaker through whom nearly all our possession play went through Clayton was chief culprit in this slow play. He had numerous opportunities to recycle play more quickly but didn't opt to take them.This is what I mean when I say Clayton was poor - in his approach to the game. Not in his technical proficiency which was excellent nor am I saying he didn't do some good things (he had plenty of the ball to do so).This lack of pace/zip to Rovers passing so very nearly cost us what should have been a very comfortable 3 points.
However I thought Rovers were relatively poor. The game didn't have the feel of a 4 or 5-1 at all for me but of a team making heavy weather of taking advantage of their numerical advantage. 2 reasons for this.Firstly we were too slow in putting a second centre forward on. This should have been done immediately after their equalizer IMO. Miller was isolated and barely had a kick.Secondly everything went through Clayton who for me was poor. He dwelt too long on the ball, slowed things down too much, eschewed playing quick passes to spread the play for simpler ones to the centre backs or to players tightly marked who could only play back to him. He made it easy for Stockport to organize themselves.