Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
POST-MATCH THREAD: Charlton Athletic v Sheffield United: Saturday 17th January 2026: KO 15:00
Comments
-
There is still a maybe in there. They hadn't scored after 35 mins and yes they should have had a pen but even Chris Wilder stated that the one thing he can complain about was the finishing. I think it's a similar situation to the Portsmouth away game, Charlton didnt finish their chances and the game becomes 'in the balance'. All imponderables, but if the game remained scoreless after sixty mins and Jones manages to deal with the problems presented by Sheff Utd, it becomes a very different game.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
Great post, you've nailed it.The Prince-e-Paul said:I think the key point from NJ post match interview, is that he knows just how good Sheff Utd are individually AND as a team. And more important, all of our players know it. Man for man, I'm pretty sure their player gets picked over ours 1-11, hence the reality is, they could, should and would, beat us most times out of 10. We've been extremely lucky to play them when out of form early season, and when having a brain fart today. The result today tells us that we can compete in this league, but with expansive entertaining football, not a hope in hells chance. The result IS everything, because the performance isn't our priority, not just today, but for the entire season.
NJ is pissed off because his team brought home the bacon today (3 points), and the fans collectively said, "Not enough!"
I hate the NJ style of play, but IF it keeps us up, will most people be happy, or still be saying, "Not enough?"
Sheff Utd are a far better side than us. If we had been the team that had 2 players sent off yesterday, it would have been a cricket score.
As much as I was one of those that was screaming for us to go for the jugular after we scored, Nathan is right to say they had enough quality on the pitch to punish us if we got wreckless0 -
When we shouldn't have. With six or seven of their players in the box there was always the chance they could get lucky.guinnessaddick said:
Where we brought everyone back for!JamesSeed said:
That or from a set piece. They had a few corners and free kicks.Callumcafc said:
Getting something on a break was going to be their only opportunity of scoring a goal. I can only remember them managing to do that once in 50 minutes of football.Swisdom said:As crap a game as it was my only real frustration was playing into Sheff Utd's hands.
Once we got the goal we shoudn't have taken a foot off their throat. They were clearly told to waste time at 1-0, stay in the game and try to nick something on the break.
We sat back and slowed it down to play right into their hands as it just frustrated home fans which boosted theirs and their players.
The biggest alarm bell is we didnt have ANYONE who wanted to be offensive or ANYONE who wanted the ball. We desperately need a playmaker. Someone who demands the ball and makes us tick.
So how was our approach playing into their hands? Keeping the foot on the throat gives them more opportunities to turn it over, more opportunities to break and more opportunities to equalise.4 -
Which makes the constant decision to never play Apter even more baffling. Personally i thought the last 20-25 minutes on Saturday would've been an ideal situation for him to come on and stretch their defence.AFKABartram said:I think one thing yesterday showed us is that TC is literally the only player likely to get game time in our squad that other teams give any form of defensive concern about.We have absolutely no one else likely to play who can beat a man.As soon as Edwards is back, TC will move to being the 20-30 min ‘game changer’ off the bench.4 -
I don’t think we’ve mentally adapted that what ‘we’ want to play isn’t correlated with Jones this season. People keep saying we need to sign a playmaker, whereas the tactics Jones wants us to play has no interest in a play maker.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Which makes the constant decision to never play Apter even more baffling. Personally i thought the last 20-25 minutes on Saturday would've been an ideal situation for him to come on and stretch their defence.AFKABartram said:I think one thing yesterday showed us is that TC is literally the only player likely to get game time in our squad that other teams give any form of defensive concern about.We have absolutely no one else likely to play who can beat a man.As soon as Edwards is back, TC will move to being the 20-30 min ‘game changer’ off the bench.
On Saturday. 45 mins of 11 v 9 most people would have expected the following to occur: we stretch the pitch as wide as possible, maintain a high defensive line, create overloads with ball worked 2v1 or 3v2 situations, utilise pace and move the ball quickly, utilise your good technical players as they have that bit more time.His first move at HT was to pull Kelman, a fast in and out player who would stretch their defence and is a ‘box finisher’ for a limited mobility target man. Sheff U would have been delighted with that as it was clear there would be less ball movement and runs, and more long diagonals, far easier to set up against with less players. The would also have been delighted he kept Anderson as the main ‘playmaker’ when with respect to Anderson, that is not his strengths.
it worked, to an extent we got 1 goal (which Dykes done great with), but that was pretty much the only decent open player opportunity we created.3 points was what matters, so that’s great. But I just so many things with the approach just didn’t make sense; risking an unused midfield 3 against a form team, playing a player out of position who was leaving the club that evening. the Kelman / Dykes tactical switch, the reliance on TC to be the only to feet outlet, the risking of a full 90 for a player who hasn’t played for 12 months and will be vital in coming weeks, the continuation of Anderson is a key creative position 2nd half when that’s not his game, how Apter got no mins at all when this was the ideal scenario for him, the bizarre pulling of Leaburn when defending a long throw in the 92nd minute.
Appreciate that’s viewed as critical. All the above doesn’t mean I wasn’t singing Nathan Jones Red and White Army all through the game and will be again on Tuesday.14 -
The problem with the goalkeeper going down tactic is that it works. If you want to stop it you have to make it not work. I agree with replacing the keeper with an outfield player for 3 mins. Unless the keeper is subbed. It isn't perfect as it penalises a genuine knock and encourages a keeper not to get treatment. Maybe replacing him for 1 minute would be enough to make teams think again. Maybe start with 1 and add a minute over time until the tactic dies. Find the number as it were. Yes, it would take time with the outfield player putting the shirt and gloves on but it wouldn't if it stops the tactic happening.0
-
They’ll find a way to stop the keeper injured situation this summer or next I reckon.The key question for us though is why do we need to be the instigator of needing to regroup, rejig tactics just 10-15 minutes into a game so frequently?10
-
Given Clarke was in acres of space on the right for most of the second half and being ignored when screaming for the ball I’m not convinced Apter would have been used even if on the pitch1
-
This weekend we were just poor. Earlier in the season there was a pattern of teams changing their formations to match us up, it happened for a few weeks and you can see why we weren’t expecting those tweaks so needed to adapt. I’m sure NJ can do that without the stoppage but if the loophole is there you may as well use itAFKABartram said:They’ll find a way to stop the keeper injured situation this summer or next I reckon.The key question for us though is why do we need to be the instigator of needing to regroup, rejig tactics just 10-15 minutes into a game so frequently?1 -
The United anti ref rants on socials and their manager’s no blame interviews - plus his Charlton should have had people sent off too moans - completely miss the point. Sheffield would have won - probably easily - if their players had kept their heads. The club ought to ask themselves why their players let them down rather than squeal it wasn’t fair. In today’s stupid football rules both incidents were complete red cards and Sheffield would be screaming that too if the boot was on the other foot.5
-
Obviously I was not alone driving home saturday after the game in thinking,what have I just seen,that was dire.
But,get home and put it all into perspective.this is the championship,a bloody hard league,what we wanted.You have 3 relegated teams,17 established or semi established teams,and 3 promoted.Of the 3 promoted,we got up by keeping clean sheets and scraping wins,not by playing teams off the park.The other 2 promoted bought their way up.
I just look at the opposition when they start at the Valley,how easily they roll the ball about,how they find space,how we always from the start seem to be under pressure.But we dig in,we hold on and,quite often we get that winner,not down to flowing football,but sheer doggedness,and until we can establish ourselves at this level,thats the way it is going to be.
Dont forget,even prior to the sending offs,Sheff utd. had not scored.Whos to say we could not have held out and won against 11.
With regard to should we have gone for more on saturday,I thought we played it right,we got the lead,keep it,dont let them near our goal,or get a breakaway,3 points ,all that mattered.
Must confess the late substitution baffled me but there you go.
On to tuesday,another very tough game,but once again winnable,one thing is certain,the players need that support,no matter how tough things are going on the pitch,those players will need all the vocal support they can get.
5 -
Sponsored links:
-
The NTT20 view
One of the strangest matches of the weekend unfolded at the Valley, where one goalmouth caught all the action. Sheffield United dominated the first half, with Tom Cannon and Patrick Bamford denied by Thomas Kaminski in the Charlton goal, and Djibril Soumaré rattling the post.
Left: Blades’ first half shots; Right: Charlton’s shots & Blades’ shot in second half
Gravity flipped late in the first period, not with Soumaré’s red, but when Blades captain Japhet Tanganga was also dismissed for a clumsy-at-best forearm smash. At 11 vs 9, Charlton dominated the second half. Sonny Carey opened the scoring within a minute, finishing neatly from debutant Lydon Dykes’ headed knockdown. It was attack-v-defence stuff from there. A huge result for Nathan Jones’ side, who secured only their second win in eight games. Significant for Sheffield United too, who lose players and ground in their bid to crash the play-off party.
1 -
https://youtube.com/shorts/JccrJViOKLA?si=69a6EVdgvSSm7HK0
Here is the verdict if a Yarkshure ref on the 2nd red!3 -
Are we now thinking that it should have been a yellow because some local ref says so, rubbish imo it was a deliberate and intentional elbow aimed at Carey's head in frustration after the earlier red card, and a red was about right, he made no attempt at all to get the ball...CharltonManor1966 said:https://youtube.com/shorts/JccrJViOKLA?si=69a6EVdgvSSm7HK0
Here is the verdict if a Yarkshure ref on the 2nd red!5 -
Look I think it's perfectly fair for NJ to say he saved us from relegation in his first (part) season. He did. We had a very technical team with passing ability but no physical presence and no desire to win the ball back (and a injury ravaged attack) .Defenders were expected to pass the ball out -leading to costly errors. NJ got the team to fight for the ball clear it into the opposition half- where we had to fight for it again. It gave the team a more aggressive physical edge. Highly suitable tactics -simple football- to get us out of trouble.golfaddick said:
What a load of fucking crap. Bringing up that we were nearly in League 2 when he came in (oh look what I've done to save us....) and that we are now playing an ex-Prem team. Nothing about the fact we played 50 mins against 9 men and narrowly won.fenaddick said:
Basically throwing the fans under the bus like he did last season.
Egotistical ******
My point is that nothing has changed. We are still playing the same stuff in a better league, where skill is more evident in opposition teams and they can handle the direct play consistently, routinely.
Yes Crawley was a low point in terms of results- but tactics wise he just doubled down and we played the same way all the way to Wembley and beyond. (and beating better footballing teams). Frankly our football didn't merit promotion.
At the Championship level, now the intense effort of the first 6/8 weeks of the season has passed we are struggling. The players recruited are a motley crew- some good (eg Bell/Kaminski/Dykes/Clarke)
-others Hernandez/Rousillion. look like panic options. Weaknesses from Lg1 remain in the squad and are getting games.
Since they seemingly haven't practised passing and passages of play it remains poor quality, misplaced, wrong weight, awkward to control. Movement by players into spaces to receive is nowhere near the league standard, and forward passes (not punts) too rare.
The Sheffield game highlighted to me the lack of progress in the standard of play. we expected a gulf vs Chelsea, but a gulf between us and Sheffield with 9 on the pitch was clear. A lack of ideas ,skill to break a weakened opposition.
I attend games now
1) already paid for a season ticket
2) I enjoy the enthusiasm from the home support (although I do inwardly smile when the "Reds are going up" is sung) and .....I 've always supported CAFC.
To those who say we are new to the league etc and survival is the key I agree but I just can't see any building blocks for anything better being put in place. There's a glass ceiling to this style, we may be near it, certainly with these players/tactics.
I do hope we survive-
11 -
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.2 -
Having watched the extended highlights, we really could have won 3-0 in the second half, but we lacked the guile and quality needed in our finishing.-Both of Miles’ one‑on‑one chances fell on his left side and led to saves you would expect a goalkeeper to make-SU cleared two headers off the line-Their keeper nearly scored an own goal from TC’s cross or shot-Dykes was inches away from turning in Clarke’s low cross-Ramsay chose to head an attacking corner in the same way he defended the one against Stoke, with Jones waiting to head it into an empty netI think the frustration from the Norwich, Portsmouth and Blackburn results, or the quality of the performances, started to show with the fans.When I watched some Championship games last season, especially the play‑offs and the final, I did expect to be hammered in possession or scoreline by some teams. For me, the whole “strange feeling”, “never felt like that”, “confused” post‑mortem has been slightly overdone now.3
-
Agree with everything you wrote except that bit in bold. That was a red 20 years ago too. No idea how old you are, but a lot will remember a season opener against Chelsea, FAPL pre Abramovic, Curbs started Paul Konchesky in midfield, and he was doing pretty well but after just 25 minutes he contested a high clearnce from our keeper, the Chelsea player went down. The ref, forget his name, but he was Graham Poll's big mate, pair of exhibitionists, immediately red-carded him. Konchesky was just trying to give himself the elevation for the header. Nowhere near as pre-meditated as Saturday's challenge.Redshift said:The United anti ref rants on socials and their manager’s no blame interviews - plus his Charlton should have had people sent off too moans - completely miss the point. Sheffield would have won - probably easily - if their players had kept their heads. The club ought to ask themselves why their players let them down rather than squeal it wasn’t fair. In today’s stupid football rules both incidents were complete red cards and Sheffield would be screaming that too if the boot was on the other foot.2 -
There's been a lot writ on here over the last couple of days about Saturday's game ranging from how we played to dismay at only beating 9-men by a single goal.
First things first: that first half was diabolical. Even the most optimistic, glass-half-full, rose-tinted-glasses-wearing fan couldn't deny that. The selected team looked wrong, players were incapable of passing to each other and a mistake loomed every time we had the ball. Anderson seemed to employing a football version of Newton's Third Law of Motion in that for every good challenge to win back the ball it had be followed by an inept pass either giving the ball back to Sheff Utd straightaway or putting a teammate under immediate pressure invariably resulting in a turnover.
It's fair to say the red cards changed the game and moved it back towards an even contest - I wouldn't say it gave us an advantage as such, just made it more level. A lot of people have moaned how we played against 9-men but they've failed to consider the minor point that Sheff Utd with nine men is a better side than us with eleven ... certainly with the side we had out at the weekend.
"But they're only 17th, just ahead of us, so we should beat a short-handed version of them" went the comments. Yes, that bit - them being 17th - was true ... but if you looked at the 10-game form table you'd see that they were second going into the weekend whereas we were second-from-bottom. In most seasons there's a side that starts badly, bimbles about the lower rungs of the table for the first half of the season and then comes home with a wet sail, storming into the play-offs. This year the Blades are likely to be this year's contenders so a win against them - coupled with the early-season victory at Brammal Lane - isn't to be sneezed at.
Was it an "obvious penalty" against Karoy in the opening minutes with his challenge on Bamford? Was it buggery! Bamford is one of the most embarrassing strikers out there at the moment and has been for a few years. He has obvious talent - his goalscoring record points to that - but his aversion to gravity is disgraceful. The moment an opposition players gets within touching distance of him he's likely to go down. Pathetic.
Whilst the first half performance was atrocious the second half effort was better ... it wasn't great by any stretch of the imagination but it was certainly an improvement on the first 45 minutes (although, admittedly, that was an exceptionally low bar).
There does seem to be a real lack of a cutting edge to our play. The second half tactics generally consisted of "give it to TC and see what he can do" with a back-up option of "Sonny, do you want the ball 30 yards out?" There's no variety, no element of surprise which make sit incredibly easy for the oppo to defend against. Even down to nine men United felt comfortably doubling up on Campbell because there was bugger all threat elsewhere. Some teams pass the ball side-to-side along the back line trying to pull the oppo out of shape and looking for a gap to break through, with multiple options of attacking players; we do it because we're clueless and we've got just Campbell and Carey (and even the Ginger One has been off-key for a few weeks now).
At the start of the season most of us had a target of 21st. Our impressive start may have lifted some people's expectations but 21st is the realistic goal. Saturday may have been a tough watch (sorry, that's just set off the understatement klaxon) and we relied on immense stupidity from the opposition to get three points but we can't look a gift horse in the mouth - we take the points, say "ta very much, safe journey home you idiots" and move onto tomorrow's game against Derby.
But don't expect to see a performance from us rivalling Brazil 1970 - it's going to be another tough, attritional (and crap) affair where three points for us is the only target.12 -
Both fouls were reds. You cannot lead with an elbow, and then the shocking challenge on Knibbs. They were masters of their own downfall, and it feels like we frustrated them into these challenges somewhat.Great to see our forwards finally combine for the goal. Think new signings are very shrewd decisions by NJ and his recruitment team.2
-
71! 65 years watching Charlton. But you’re right. Always a red card. But today’s rules are silly.PragueAddick said:
Agree with everything you wrote except that bit in bold. That was a red 20 years ago too. No idea how old you are, but a lot will remember a season opener against Chelsea, FAPL pre Abramovic, Curbs started Paul Konchesky in midfield, and he was doing pretty well but after just 25 minutes he contested a high clearnce from our keeper, the Chelsea player went down. The ref, forget his name, but he was Graham Poll's big mate, pair of exhibitionists, immediately red-carded him. Konchesky was just trying to give himself the elevation for the header. Nowhere near as pre-meditated as Saturday's challenge.Redshift said:The United anti ref rants on socials and their manager’s no blame interviews - plus his Charlton should have had people sent off too moans - completely miss the point. Sheffield would have won - probably easily - if their players had kept their heads. The club ought to ask themselves why their players let them down rather than squeal it wasn’t fair. In today’s stupid football rules both incidents were complete red cards and Sheffield would be screaming that too if the boot was on the other foot.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
0
-
I mean its "something" - But take Saturday for example, Kaminski goes down injured, meanng in the future we have to take off an outfield player for 30-secs... Oh look, might as well sacrifice Kelman for that amount of time, seeing that we cant get out of our half.fenaddick said:1 -
I just don’t believe that was one of the worst performances in 60 years! Come on, get a sense of perspective. Even this season, Southampton ran through us 5 times in a row and scored 5 goals. It was Groundhog Day. We did not play at all well against Sheff Utd but we didn’t concede on minute 2, minute 5 and on and on. We will be stronger against Derby.5
-
PBr said:I just don’t believe that was one of the worst performances in 60 years! Come on, get a sense of perspective. Even this season, Southampton ran through us 5 times in a row and scored 5 goals. It was Groundhog Day. We did not play at all well against Sheff Utd but we didn’t concede on minute 2, minute 5 and on and on. We will be stronger against Derby.The game was potentially going the same way as what it did at Portman Road, we rode our luck massively at Ipswich earlier in the season, somehow got to HT at 0-0 and then managed to get an early goal to defend - We were bloody lucky that day, that it helped open Ipswich up and allowed us to score twice more.There is no guarantee that the same couldn't have happened against Sheff Utd, and by the time the sendings off happened, we were "slowly" getting a "foothold" in the game - The difference between the Ipswich game, and against Sheff Utd, is the fact everyone seemed to expect us to turn into prime Brazil, as Briston mentions, simply because we had the advantage in players. But Sheff Utd because it wasn't 11 vs 11, couldnt afford to take the risk to attack us, like what Ipswich did, otherwise Campbell would have exploited the space, exactly how he did at Portman Road.3
-
When they went down to 9 men, they played a high defensive line as was their only real option, forcing us to try and play round then, or, if we had the guile and ability, play the defence splitting pass through the back line for someone to run onto, eg, Jason Euell at Arsenal for our 4th goal.ForeverAddickted said:PBr said:I just don’t believe that was one of the worst performances in 60 years! Come on, get a sense of perspective. Even this season, Southampton ran through us 5 times in a row and scored 5 goals. It was Groundhog Day. We did not play at all well against Sheff Utd but we didn’t concede on minute 2, minute 5 and on and on. We will be stronger against Derby.The game was potentially going the same way as what it did at Portman Road, we rode our luck massively at Ipswich earlier in the season, somehow got to HT at 0-0 and then managed to get an early goal to defend - We were bloody lucky that day, that it helped open Ipswich up and allowed us to score twice more.There is no guarantee that the same couldn't have happened against Sheff Utd, and by the time the sendings off happened, we were "slowly" getting a "foothold" in the game - The difference between the Ipswich game, and against Sheff Utd, is the fact everyone seemed to expect us to turn into prime Brazil, as Briston mentions, simply because we had the advantage in players. But Sheff Utd because it wasn't 11 vs 11, couldnt afford to take the risk to attack us, like what Ipswich did, otherwise Campbell would have exploited the space, exactly how he did at Portman Road.2 -
I didn't expect us to turn into prime Brazil at all. I didn't even expect us to smash them. I did expect us to be able to do the absolute basics. Like find players who are standing five yards away, while under no pressure, and not pass the ball out of play instead. And to hit passes at a speed that allows the player to take advantage of the space, and not him them so slowly that, by the time the ball reaches him, the whole opposition have totally shifted over.ForeverAddickted said:PBr said:I just don’t believe that was one of the worst performances in 60 years! Come on, get a sense of perspective. Even this season, Southampton ran through us 5 times in a row and scored 5 goals. It was Groundhog Day. We did not play at all well against Sheff Utd but we didn’t concede on minute 2, minute 5 and on and on. We will be stronger against Derby.The game was potentially going the same way as what it did at Portman Road, we rode our luck massively at Ipswich earlier in the season, somehow got to HT at 0-0 and then managed to get an early goal to defend - We were bloody lucky that day, that it helped open Ipswich up and allowed us to score twice more.There is no guarantee that the same couldn't have happened against Sheff Utd, and by the time the sendings off happened, we were "slowly" getting a "foothold" in the game - The difference between the Ipswich game, and against Sheff Utd, is the fact everyone seemed to expect us to turn into prime Brazil, as Briston mentions, simply because we had the advantage in players. But Sheff Utd because it wasn't 11 vs 11, couldnt afford to take the risk to attack us, like what Ipswich did, otherwise Campbell would have exploited the space, exactly how he did at Portman Road.
Our lack of quality and attacking frailty were fully exposed by the numerical advantage. We had acres of space and didn't know what to do with it.8 -
Comes back to what I said on another thread, where I wonder how much the effect of not winning has had on these players. Especially losing at Blackburn after surrendering the 2-goal lead... Not trying to find excuses, and would hope to see better tomorrow night... Just trying to understand if anything.Chunes said:
I didn't expect us to turn into prime Brazil at all. I didn't even expect us to smash them. I did expect us to be able to do the absolute basics. Like find players who are standing five yards away, while under no pressure, and not pass the ball out of play instead. And to hit passes at a speed that allows the player to take advantage of the space, and not him them so slowly that, by the time the ball reaches him, the whole opposition have totally shifted over.ForeverAddickted said:PBr said:I just don’t believe that was one of the worst performances in 60 years! Come on, get a sense of perspective. Even this season, Southampton ran through us 5 times in a row and scored 5 goals. It was Groundhog Day. We did not play at all well against Sheff Utd but we didn’t concede on minute 2, minute 5 and on and on. We will be stronger against Derby.The game was potentially going the same way as what it did at Portman Road, we rode our luck massively at Ipswich earlier in the season, somehow got to HT at 0-0 and then managed to get an early goal to defend - We were bloody lucky that day, that it helped open Ipswich up and allowed us to score twice more.There is no guarantee that the same couldn't have happened against Sheff Utd, and by the time the sendings off happened, we were "slowly" getting a "foothold" in the game - The difference between the Ipswich game, and against Sheff Utd, is the fact everyone seemed to expect us to turn into prime Brazil, as Briston mentions, simply because we had the advantage in players. But Sheff Utd because it wasn't 11 vs 11, couldnt afford to take the risk to attack us, like what Ipswich did, otherwise Campbell would have exploited the space, exactly how he did at Portman Road.3 -
I'm right behind NJ but the first half team set up and performance was really bad, no question and we would have lost 5-0 if 11v11. I think deep down NJ knows he got that all wrong and is probably why he's had a bit of a 'remind us what he's done post match interview theme'. It's one thing parking the bus but to have absolutely zero outlet against a team who attack,attack, attack with gay abandon and think we can last 60 minutes is reading comics (or coaching manuals short of reality). However, i do get where he's coming from with Sheff Utd's individual ability and why we didn't throw everything at racking up the goals second half. I was also calling for coventry and apter but lets be honest, they only need to get 1 on 1 with apter in a breakaway situation and they walk past him. It was a tough, draining watch but if you're a committed supporter, it was still thoroughly engaging and real drama - we we were a crap watch in the play offs for a neutral but thoroughly absorbed with the tension if a committed fan. Chances are tomorrow night will be similar - i'd take that right now if we end up with 3 points.9
-
The best way to deal with the injured player going off and waiting to go back on,is to make sure the player that made the foul also goes off, no advantage.PragueAddick said:
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.1 -
Easy to game that though. Short forward gets fouled by Lloyd Jones, contact is minimal but the forward realises if he "needs treatment' that Jones can't defend the cross from the free kick so calls the physio on and we effectively have our best defender in a sin binSword65pf said:
The best way to deal with the injured player going off and waiting to go back on,is to make sure the player that made the foul also goes off, no advantage.PragueAddick said:
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.6
