Have you listened to SCP interview last night, he is not in denial about the performance calls it work in practice, patchy in the style in which we want to play and that we will be working hard on our attacking style.
Spot on the money the interviews SCP gives are fantastic he even takes of Nolly asking people to Discuss.
when asked if he had seen BWP's dad he says yep i just tried to sign him.
BWP had very few balls to his feet. Spent most of the game jumping for punted passes, most of which he got (despite his size) but no one along side .....SCP was frantic at times when Charlton were slow to balls in space being met by Colchester players in both penalty areas.
Slightly concerned that the only dangerous moments we created were when Francis and Wagstaff (once) got to the byline and put over a decent cross
Don't recall us doing anything down the left hand side, although Bessone had a comfortable debut.
You can sort of see that Powell is trying to get us to press more and be more positive, but the players still seem tentative and I lost count of the number of times the ball ended up going back to Elliott to hoof upfield.
In the second half we showed more urgency but no more guile or quality.
Thought colchester's non-goal was a turning point ; had it been allowed to stand I believe they would have gone on to win.
I said when BWP and Eccles came in that our lack of chance creation might turn them into non-scoring strikers like most of our forwards since Bent.
I guess the difference is with these two is that they are a step up in quality.Eccles created the opportunity for himself last week and yesterday BWP found space in the box and finished with aplomb.
One chance, one goal.
I guess SCP will get a prolonged honeymoon period from the fans and you can't really argue with 2 wins and 2 clean sheets.
Be interesting to see if we get in any loanees - I think we could do with one or two.
From another thread, but seeing ISaw has posted the match link above:
[cite]Posted By: siblers[/cite]
Colchester player looked well onside for their goal
I've just spent the past 5 minutes freezing the frame to try and capture the moment when the ball was played.
According to the screen shot, at the moment the ball was played, the Colchester forward is marginally goalside of the last defender - but it is marginal.
Now I can only make my judgement from the TV camera angle; the assistant may well have been better placed actually in line with the ball.......and judged the Colchester forward to be in line with the Charlton defender.
It's a call so close, that rightly or wrongly, could be given offside.
The amazing thing is the referee is at least 10 or 12 yards behind play at this moment.
Surely he was never placed to even make an offside call....?
What was he thinking, blowing his whistle without first checking for his assistant's signal?
[cite]Posted By: Oggy Red[/cite]What was he thinking, blowing his whistle without first checking for his assistant's signal?
He just made a mistake mate. People make mistakes. The bloke who gave a goal that wasn't for Watford against Palace is now a PL ref.
It maybe that in the history of the professional game, a referee has never before blown by mistake immediately prior to a ball going into the net and then given a goal. Personally I doubt that is unique.
What is unique is the 4th Official being able to intervene resulting in the Ref making the correct decision given his initial error. That is a new aspect and comes directly our of the Watford/Palace situation where a mistake resulted in a goal that never was.
[cite]Posted By: bingaddick[/cite]He just made a mistake mate. People make mistakes.
Agree, Bing. I'd mentioned that already in previous posts - but what I had found unacceptable then was the fact that the referee had tried to conceal his mistake of blowing his whistle in error ..... and pretend he had not already stopped the game.
Anyway my post above wasn't about that ......... having frozen the frame on the video, it's clear the referee was 10-12 yards behind play and never in a position to even see an offside situation.
[cite]Posted By: ThreadKiller[/cite]just get rid of off side. just a waste of time rule and the game has moved on from when it was invented.
The tried this out in the league cup or some such in Scotland and it really didn't work. Teams started goal hanging and playing the ball long, so the other team ended up playing their defence deeper. It stretched the game out, but not in a positive way and didn't lead to more goals. I suppose it's worth another try.
[cite]Posted By: ThreadKiller[/cite]just get rid of off side. just a waste of time rule and the game has moved on from when it was invented.
The tried this out in the league cup or some such in Scotland and it really didn't work. Teams started goal hanging and playing the ball long, so the other team ended up playing their defence deeper. It stretched the game out, but not in a positive way and didn't lead to more goals. I suppose it's worth another try.
Why not have 2 new lines either side of halway line, effectively splitting the field into 3/3's.
Those 2 lines are the 'offside lines': beyond those lines the offside rule would apply. it would cut out players being caught offside just inside the opponents half which is ridiculous and kills the game. At the same time noone could 'goal hang'
I've seen this tried before (at an amateur level) and it worked well.
Powell clearly has the problem of getting the best out of what does look a very decent League 1 squad. I think the key is movement - now we have Bessone (who is definitely left footed) we can look to our full backs to provide the width. This would allow us a midfield of Semedo, Racon and Jackson and we could play a mobile front 3 of Anyinsah, BWP and Ecclestone - this would provide loads of pace and strength and the key would be for them to interchange with each other throughout. May require a little time to build an undertsanding, but that attack should frighten opponents. And there are ample opportunitys to change things from the bench - fry, McCormack, Waggy, Reid, Benson......
[cite]Posted By: ThreadKiller[/cite]just get rid of off side. just a waste of time rule and the game has moved on from when it was invented.
The tried this out in the league cup or some such in Scotland and it really didn't work. Teams started goal hanging and playing the ball long, so the other team ended up playing their defence deeper. It stretched the game out, but not in a positive way and didn't lead to more goals. I suppose it's worth another try.
Benson and BWP will be the front pairing. Am prepared to back that up with some wonga. Fancy saying a player who has been bought on after suspension for 20 odd minutes with a new strike partner into a team playing bloody awaful played badly. You have got to be kidding !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Moroccan and the Belgian will help. Masicat never wrong, NEVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What is unique is the 4th Official being able to intervene resulting in the Ref making the correct decision given his initial error.
You're right of course, Bing - having blown his whistle the correct call was a drop-ball.
However, as the U's fans would no doubt point out, the "correct" decision arguably was no decision, because their guy was onside, the lino didn't flag, and the "goal" should have stood.
[cite]Posted Six-a-bag-of-nuts[/cite]......because their guy was onside, the lino didn't flag, and the "goal" should have stood.
No, no, no, Sixer - the goal couldn't stand......... not according to the Laws of the Game.
The referee blew his whistle which stopped the game, before the ball was kicked into the net.
The game was already "dead", so continuing play can not be permitted.
Therefore, under no circumstances could the "goal" stand.
[cite]Posted Six-a-bag-of-nuts[/cite]......because their guy was onside, the lino didn't flag, and the "goal" should have stood.
No, no, no, Sixer - the goal couldn't stand......... not according to the Laws of the Game.
The referee blew his whistle which stopped the game, before the ball was kicked into the net.
The game was already "dead", so continuing play can not be permitted.
Therefore, under no circumstances could the "goal" stand.
The referee blew his whistle which stopped the game, before the ball was kicked into the net.
The game was already "dead", so continuing play can not be permitted.
Therefore, under no circumstances could the "goal" stand.
[cite]Posted Six-a-bag-of-nuts[/cite]......because their guy was onside, the lino didn't flag, and the "goal" should have stood.
No, no, no, Sixer - the goal couldn't stand......... not according to the Laws of the Game.
The referee blew his whistle which stopped the game, before the ball was kicked into the net.
The game was already "dead", so continuing play can not be permitted.
Therefore, under no circumstances could the "goal" stand.
You're right of course, Bing Oggy- having blown his whistlethe correct call was a drop-ball.
However, as the U's fans would no doubt point out, the "correct" decision arguably was no decision, because their guy was onside, the lino didn't flag, and the "goal" should have stood. ;-)
Comments
Spot on the money the interviews SCP gives are fantastic he even takes of Nolly asking people to Discuss.
when asked if he had seen BWP's dad he says yep i just tried to sign him.
The fella is top draw
We are going the right way
Don't recall us doing anything down the left hand side, although Bessone had a comfortable debut.
You can sort of see that Powell is trying to get us to press more and be more positive, but the players still seem tentative and I lost count of the number of times the ball ended up going back to Elliott to hoof upfield.
In the second half we showed more urgency but no more guile or quality.
Thought colchester's non-goal was a turning point ; had it been allowed to stand I believe they would have gone on to win.
I said when BWP and Eccles came in that our lack of chance creation might turn them into non-scoring strikers like most of our forwards since Bent.
I guess the difference is with these two is that they are a step up in quality.Eccles created the opportunity for himself last week and yesterday BWP found space in the box and finished with aplomb.
One chance, one goal.
I guess SCP will get a prolonged honeymoon period from the fans and you can't really argue with 2 wins and 2 clean sheets.
Be interesting to see if we get in any loanees - I think we could do with one or two.
1] That refereeing debacle over the goal was the funniest thing I have seen for years, that was real Keystone Cops stuff.
2] BWP's goal was top-class, that sort of thing could be the difference between promotion or not.
3] Oxo earnt his corn with that clearance, would have been easy to miscue that into his own net.
On CAFC Player, they come on 24 hours after the game finishes.
I've just spent the past 5 minutes freezing the frame to try and capture the moment when the ball was played.
According to the screen shot, at the moment the ball was played, the Colchester forward is marginally goalside of the last defender - but it is marginal.
Now I can only make my judgement from the TV camera angle; the assistant may well have been better placed actually in line with the ball.......and judged the Colchester forward to be in line with the Charlton defender.
It's a call so close, that rightly or wrongly, could be given offside.
The amazing thing is the referee is at least 10 or 12 yards behind play at this moment.
Surely he was never placed to even make an offside call....?
What was he thinking, blowing his whistle without first checking for his assistant's signal?
No bold comments in that post.
He just made a mistake mate. People make mistakes. The bloke who gave a goal that wasn't for Watford against Palace is now a PL ref.
It maybe that in the history of the professional game, a referee has never before blown by mistake immediately prior to a ball going into the net and then given a goal. Personally I doubt that is unique.
What is unique is the 4th Official being able to intervene resulting in the Ref making the correct decision given his initial error. That is a new aspect and comes directly our of the Watford/Palace situation where a mistake resulted in a goal that never was.
Anyway my post above wasn't about that ......... having frozen the frame on the video, it's clear the referee was 10-12 yards behind play and never in a position to even see an offside situation.
PS: Bold comments to reassure Off_it.
We won and thats another assist for Waggy and a Debut Goal for BWP
Why not have 2 new lines either side of halway line, effectively splitting the field into 3/3's.
Those 2 lines are the 'offside lines': beyond those lines the offside rule would apply. it would cut out players being caught offside just inside the opponents half which is ridiculous and kills the game. At the same time noone could 'goal hang'
I've seen this tried before (at an amateur level) and it worked well.
One more thing for the officials to get wrong
Benson and BWP will be the front pairing. Am prepared to back that up with some wonga. Fancy saying a player who has been bought on after suspension for 20 odd minutes with a new strike partner into a team playing bloody awaful played badly. You have got to be kidding !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Moroccan and the Belgian will help. Masicat never wrong, NEVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ANY WONGA OFFERED??
Masicat always right.............
You're right of course, Bing - having blown his whistle the correct call was a drop-ball.
However, as the U's fans would no doubt point out, the "correct" decision arguably was no decision, because their guy was onside, the lino didn't flag, and the "goal" should have stood.
No, no, no, Sixer - the goal couldn't stand......... not according to the Laws of the Game.
The referee blew his whistle which stopped the game, before the ball was kicked into the net.
The game was already "dead", so continuing play can not be permitted.
Therefore, under no circumstances could the "goal" stand.
exactly. just ask clive thomas.
You're right of course, Bing Oggy- having blown his whistle the correct call was a drop-ball.
However, as the U's fans would no doubt point out, the "correct" decision arguably was no decision, because their guy was onside, the lino didn't flag, and the "goal" should have stood. ;-)