Well what do we think ?

[dickos1]

The point, Dickos is that in this case the advantage didn't come to nothing a player got a shot off and on target.  The advantage rule doesn't require that a goal be scored for advantage to have been satisfied.

No but if it was on the edge of the box and the player got a shot off which got blocked the ref would’ve gone back n given a free kick

[ravenrover]

When the "shot" was cleared the players turned to him and he held up his arms to show advantage had been played. Need to watch a bit more carefully next time

[scawsby steve]

Agreed Filo, and the ref had the option to bring play back to the foul on Rowe after Taylor failed to score.
It was only a second or two after the foul on Rowe.

why bring the play back if he played advantage then Taylor should of scored you can’t then bring play back cos he missed

Yes he can, try to let play go on but if no advantage has been gained then go back to the penalty decision.

Ref played advantage; Advantage was gained in the opportunity to get a shot on goal;  End of advantage.  Absolutely no justification for the Ref to bring play back, indeed he would probably have been wrong to do so.

I agree with that, once he's played advantage. But playing advantage there was a poor decision.

Disagree, if he gives the pen and we score we'd all be fuming.  It was clearly a chance, I just don't know if the advantage is over straight away. Outside the box advantage is played for ages then pulled back so why not there?

I didn't see the referee gesture for advantage played so we seem to be discussing nothing? The ref didn't deem it a foul and Taylor tried to pick his spot and it was saved on the line. If that had gone in bottom corner we would have been praising his calmness. Fine margins.

If the ref didn't deem that a foul, then he should never referee a game ever again. The keeper wiped Tommy completely out.

If a stonewall penalty is denied in order to play advantage, the only possible advantage would be a goal. A goal wasn't scored. The delayed penalty should have been given.

Absolutely atrocious refereeing. Worse than the two other penalty decisions.

[drfchound]

Agreed Filo, and the ref had the option to bring play back to the foul on Rowe after Taylor failed to score.
It was only a second or two after the foul on Rowe.

why bring the play back if he played advantage then Taylor should of scored you can’t then bring play back cos he missed

Yes he can, try to let play go on but if no advantage has been gained then go back to the penalty decision.

Ref played advantage; Advantage was gained in the opportunity to get a shot on goal;  End of advantage.  Absolutely no justification for the Ref to bring play back, indeed he would probably have been wrong to do so.

I agree with that, once he's played advantage. But playing advantage there was a poor decision.

Disagree, if he gives the pen and we score we'd all be fuming.  It was clearly a chance, I just don't know if the advantage is over straight away. Outside the box advantage is played for ages then pulled back so why not there?

I didn't see the referee gesture for advantage played so we seem to be discussing nothing? The ref didn't deem it a foul and Taylor tried to pick his spot and it was saved on the line. If that had gone in bottom corner we would have been praising his calmness. Fine margins.

If the ref didn't deem that a foul, then he should never referee a game ever again. The keeper wiped Tommy completely out.

If a stonewall penalty is denied in order to play advantage, the only possible advantage would be a goal. A goal wasn't scored. The delayed penalty should have been given.

Absolutely atrocious refereeing. Worse than the two other penalty decisions.

100% correct SS.
Anyone who watches football on the tv will know that the same situation arises all the time, VAR gets involved and almost every time a penalty is awarded.

[ravenrover]

Rookie ref it's all about him showing authority and his application of the rules as he deems correct to the watching adjudicator.
Do they ever run videos back with the ref and discuss decisions he made correctly and those incorrectly? Is there anywhere that the adjudicators scores are made public?

[drfchound]

Just listened to Grant’s interview in full BST and I didn’t hear him say it was as bad as the rubbish of last season and I didn’t hear him trashing the players.

So I think your attempt to align your analysis with that of the Manager’s is not only inaccurate but also goes to underline your unfounded arrogance, of which there are many examples on here.

You are entitled to an opinion of course, but you must also accept that your opinions may be contradicted when they are complete rubbish.

Where have I been trashing the players?

It's my opinion that today, with the great majority of our players available, we put in a very poor performance overall and I've given some specific areas where i think we were very poor. Im genuinely bemused that anyone thinks differently. You are free to explain why you disagree.

Or you can just scream that I'm being arrogant.

You trashed the players collectively in your first post when you said that the performance was as bad as anything seen last season.
After you were challenged you back pedalled a bit and toned down your criticism.

[Padge_DRFC]

Time will tell but have we upgraded in certain areas or just got a bigger squad this year? Knoyle would obviously start. I think Maxwell is decent anyway. On form Anderson is probably better than Wood. Will the 2 new CMs do better than Close and Biggins? Ironside is completely different to Miller. Lawlor probably an upgrade. Roberts and Satona? Probably

[dickos1]

Sterrie is better than knoyle
I don’t know what form suggests Anderson is better than wood, Anderson hasn’t shown any form for 3 years,
Bailey and Broadbent are definitely good additions to the squad last year we had close and biggins and nobody else, Bailey looks an excellent signing to me.
Ironside will be good, he was very poor yesterday but against Wednesday and York he looked like just what we need

[Padge_DRFC]

I meant to put when on form re Anderson. Which agreed hasn't been for a while.

[scawsby steve]

I think Sterry and Nixon are both better defenders than Knoyle, who was decent going forward, but poor at defending, especially when dealing with crosses at the far post.

[Donnywolf]

Rookie ref it's all about him showing authority and his application of the rules as he deems correct to the watching adjudicator.
Do they ever run videos back with the ref and discuss decisions he made correctly and those incorrectly? Is there anywhere that the adjudicators scores are made public?

Yes .... at the risk of repeating myself (I don't do it very often)     I thought for first 45 minutes the Ref looked NOTHING like a man making his EFL debut


In the next 59 minutes he looked NOTHING like a Ref

[Donnywolf]

Rookie ref it's all about him showing authority and his application of the rules as he deems correct to the watching adjudicator.
Do they ever run videos back with the ref and discuss decisions he made correctly and those incorrectly? Is there anywhere that the adjudicators scores are made public?

I have advocated the publishing of Ref Assessors Reports since Copps was a lad

I saw one once and it was a revelation . Every single aspect of the Refs performance was under the microscope

Unfortunately it is now a closed shop. You never get to see what the Assessor has seen , commented on or criticised a Ref for and that's a great shame

Ok , yesterday it ended 0-1 and the result is in the record books but I would have loved it if the Assessor criticised Tallis for not awarding a Penalty at one end while allowing the one at the other

His first game didn't go well really did it.

[Ryaldinhio]

Agreed Filo, and the ref had the option to bring play back to the foul on Rowe after Taylor failed to score.
It was only a second or two after the foul on Rowe.

why bring the play back if he played advantage then Taylor should of scored you can’t then bring play back cos he missed

Yes he can, try to let play go on but if no advantage has been gained then go back to the penalty decision.

Ref played advantage; Advantage was gained in the opportunity to get a shot on goal;  End of advantage.  Absolutely no justification for the Ref to bring play back, indeed he would probably have been wrong to do so.

I agree with that, once he's played advantage. But playing advantage there was a poor decision.

Disagree, if he gives the pen and we score we'd all be fuming.  It was clearly a chance, I just don't know if the advantage is over straight away. Outside the box advantage is played for ages then pulled back so why not there?

I didn't see the referee gesture for advantage played so we seem to be discussing nothing? The ref didn't deem it a foul and Taylor tried to pick his spot and it was saved on the line. If that had gone in bottom corner we would have been praising his calmness. Fine margins.

If the ref didn't deem that a foul, then he should never referee a game ever again. The keeper wiped Tommy completely out.

If a stonewall penalty is denied in order to play advantage, the only possible advantage would be a goal. A goal wasn't scored. The delayed penalty should have been given.

Absolutely atrocious refereeing. Worse than the two other penalty decisions.

I totally agree mate, it was a pen.

What I'm saying is people are debating how long an advantage can be played but the ref didn't gesture for advantage being played so as far as I can tell just didn't deem it a foul.

[danumdon]

Over dramatic, over officious and full of himself. His constant hand and arm gestures to all incidents was like an over pompous orchestra conductor, totally unnecessary.

The bloke was a proper plum, i would love to see what his assessor made of his "performance" how he could explain the two penalty decisions with the conclusions he came to cannot be considered as consistent.

[ravenrover]

Agreed Filo, and the ref had the option to bring play back to the foul on Rowe after Taylor failed to score.
It was only a second or two after the foul on Rowe.

why bring the play back if he played advantage then Taylor should of scored you can’t then bring play back cos he missed

Yes he can, try to let play go on but if no advantage has been gained then go back to the penalty decision.

Ref played advantage; Advantage was gained in the opportunity to get a shot on goal;  End of advantage.  Absolutely no justification for the Ref to bring play back, indeed he would probably have been wrong to do so.

I agree with that, once he's played advantage. But playing advantage there was a poor decision.

Disagree, if he gives the pen and we score we'd all be fuming.  It was clearly a chance, I just don't know if the advantage is over straight away. Outside the box advantage is played for ages then pulled back so why not there?

I didn't see the referee gesture for advantage played so we seem to be discussing nothing? The ref didn't deem it a foul and Taylor tried to pick his spot and it was saved on the line. If that had gone in bottom corner we would have been praising his calmness. Fine margins.

If the ref didn't deem that a foul, then he should never referee a game ever again. The keeper wiped Tommy completely out.

If a stonewall penalty is denied in order to play advantage, the only possible advantage would be a goal. A goal wasn't scored. The delayed penalty should have been given.

Absolutely atrocious refereeing. Worse than the two other penalty decisions.

I totally agree mate, it was a pen.

What I'm saying is people are debating how long an advantage can be played but the ref didn't gesture for advantage being played so as far as I can tell just didn't deem it a foul.

Problem there is he did indicate he had played advantage after we failed to score

[GazLaz]

Sterrie is better than knoyle
I don’t know what form suggests Anderson is better than wood, Anderson hasn’t shown any form for 3 years,
Bailey and Broadbent are definitely good additions to the squad last year we had close and biggins and nobody else, Bailey looks an excellent signing to me.
Ironside will be good, he was very poor yesterday but against Wednesday and York he looked like just what we need

Sterry being better than Knoyle is a big call. He’s absolutely not based on previous performances anyway.

[dickos1]

Sterrie is better than knoyle
I don’t know what form suggests Anderson is better than wood, Anderson hasn’t shown any form for 3 years,
Bailey and Broadbent are definitely good additions to the squad last year we had close and biggins and nobody else, Bailey looks an excellent signing to me.
Ironside will be good, he was very poor yesterday but against Wednesday and York he looked like just what we need

Sterry being better than Knoyle is a big call. He’s absolutely not based on previous performances anyway.

I think knoyle had half a dozen good games for us over 2 years.
I’ve only seen sterry play twice so it’s probably too early to say he’s better but he looks a much better defender and more composed on the ball

[Jonathan]

It was frustrating at times and nowhere near the standard I believe we will reach as the season progresses. But it was good to be back. Dare I say there were notable improvements from last season in the fundamentals!

Individuals will improve, as will the team. Ironside will clearly get a lot better than that showing, and most importantly we need to get crosses into the box for him to attack. We didn’t do that yesterday, but it will come. No rash changes yet, but the midfield does look like it needs someone that can get their foot on the ball and get their head up. I’m not sure if Close is that player. He’ll have to show more of the other side of the game to get in McCann’s team. I like Bailey, he gives the others the license to play and we just need to get the balance right.

[danumdon]

It was frustrating at times and nowhere near the standard I believe we will reach as the season progresses. But it was good to be back. Dare I say there were notable improvements from last season in the fundamentals!

Individuals will improve, as will the team. Ironside will clearly get a lot better than that showing, and most importantly we need to get crosses into the box for him to attack. We didn’t do that yesterday, but it will come. No rash changes yet, but the midfield does look like it needs someone that can get their foot on the ball and get their head up. I’m not sure if Close is that player. He’ll have to show more of the other side of the game to get in McCann’s team. I like Bailey, he gives the others the license to play and we just need to get the balance right.

I know its all hindsight but i do wonder what a fit Close or Westbrooke playing in Rowe's position on saturdday might have been able to achieve, we desperatly missed the imput that players like them can have on a game.

I wonder if GM might still have irons in the fire for just this this eventuality?

[tommy toes]

Another thing that peed me off about the ref (apart from the penalty) was when he kept the Rovers player waiting to get back on, until the crowd got on his back.
Then he gave this petulant wave without looking at the player, with a smug look on his face.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

It was frustrating at times and nowhere near the standard I believe we will reach as the season progresses. But it was good to be back. Dare I say there were notable improvements from last season in the fundamentals!

Individuals will improve, as will the team. Ironside will clearly get a lot better than that showing, and most importantly we need to get crosses into the box for him to attack. We didn’t do that yesterday, but it will come. No rash changes yet, but the midfield does look like it needs someone that can get their foot on the ball and get their head up. I’m not sure if Close is that player. He’ll have to show more of the other side of the game to get in McCann’s team. I like Bailey, he gives the others the license to play and we just need to get the balance right.

I know its all hindsight but i do wonder what a fit Close or Westbrooke playing in Rowe's position on saturdday might have been able to achieve, we desperatly missed the imput that players like them can have on a game.

I wonder if GM might still have irons in the fire for just this this eventuality?

Probably, in the first 15 to 20 mins of a game when everything's at 100mph, it probably wouldn't suit Close but when things hopefully settle down while teams try to establish their patterns, then Close would come in to his own.

Having thought about the game with Harrogates's two nifty players, no 9  & no 12, who caused us all sorts of problems, maybe an alternative set up for us could be with Roberts and Molyneux tucked in as two advanced midfield players, who can turn and run at the opposition. They could be supported by an anchor midfield player and wing backs, but they could cause mayhem down the inside channels and probably link things up better to Miller playing off the shoulder.

[Beerseller]

Another thing that peed me off about the ref (apart from the penalty) was when he kept the Rovers player waiting to get back on, until the crowd got on his back.
Then he gave this petulant wave without looking at the player, with a smug look on his face.

Isn't it one of the new rules that a player has to stay off the pitch for 30 seconds? 

[donnievic]

Agreed Filo, and the ref had the option to bring play back to the foul on Rowe after Taylor failed to score.
It was only a second or two after the foul on Rowe.

why bring the play back if he played advantage then Taylor should of scored you can’t then bring play back cos he missed

Yes he can, try to let play go on but if no advantage has been gained then go back to the penalty decision.

Ref played advantage; Advantage was gained in the opportunity to get a shot on goal;  End of advantage.  Absolutely no justification for the Ref to bring play back, indeed he would probably have been wrong to do so.

I agree with that, once he's played advantage. But playing advantage there was a poor decision.

i gmdont think it was would put a im tone 7 yard out and 2 defenders on the line to score rather than a pen 12 yards out with keeper in the goal and if Taylor had of scored we would all be saying what good advantage he played

[Colin C No.3]

Taylor couldn’t hit a barn door with a tractor.

[danumdon]

Taylor couldn’t hit a barn door with a tractor.

Yea but the thing is he did hit the barn door, its just there was someone stood in it.

The only thing Taylor did wrong was in going for accuracy he didn't hit it hard enough, if he had put his laces through it regardless where the defender was he would probably have scored. Fine margins.

[Copps is Magic]

Taylor is there to create chances that wouldn't otherwise be created. Everyone knows, including himself and the manager, that's he's not the best finisher.

[jmt23]

I did initially blame Taylor’s inability- and still do, but the blame should be shared 60/40. Molyneux should do better with his chance - admittedly harder, but if you’re going to lob a keeper, always go for the far post if you have any angle - for goodness sake these are pro’s, this basic stuff should be drilled in.
Taylor by the way never wanted the responsibility of the shot, he was desperately looking for someone to pass too - it will probably be eating away at him right now, a shame really his confidence would’ve been sky high after such a lay off.

Shouldn’t have watched the highlights I’m frustrated again

[i_ateallthepies]

Agreed Filo, and the ref had the option to bring play back to the foul on Rowe after Taylor failed to score.
It was only a second or two after the foul on Rowe.

why bring the play back if he played advantage then Taylor should of scored you can’t then bring play back cos he missed

Yes he can, try to let play go on but if no advantage has been gained then go back to the penalty decision.

Ref played advantage; Advantage was gained in the opportunity to get a shot on goal;  End of advantage.  Absolutely no justification for the Ref to bring play back, indeed he would probably have been wrong to do so.

I agree with that, once he's played advantage. But playing advantage there was a poor decision.

Disagree, if he gives the pen and we score we'd all be fuming.  It was clearly a chance, I just don't know if the advantage is over straight away. Outside the box advantage is played for ages then pulled back so why not there?

I didn't see the referee gesture for advantage played so we seem to be discussing nothing? The ref didn't deem it a foul and Taylor tried to pick his spot and it was saved on the line. If that had gone in bottom corner we would have been praising his calmness. Fine margins.

If the ref didn't deem that a foul, then he should never referee a game ever again. The keeper wiped Tommy completely out.

If a stonewall penalty is denied in order to play advantage, the only possible advantage would be a goal. A goal wasn't scored. The delayed penalty should have been given.

Absolutely atrocious refereeing. Worse than the two other penalty decisions.

You do realise, Steve that a penalty doesn't guarantee a goal?  Your logic would mean that if a penalty is awarded and no goal scored it should be taken again.

[Bentley Bullet]

Under the Powers and Duties section of Law 5, it is stated that “The referee: …allows play to continue when an infringement or offence occurs and the non-offending team will benefit from the advantage and penalizes the infringement or offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time or within a few seconds.”

[i_ateallthepies]

And in the case being discussed advantage was gained in that a shot on target was had.  A powder puff shot admittedly but a shot nonetheless.