West Brom vs West Ham - Saturday 16.09.17 3:00 Match Thread

1234568

Comments

  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Just woken up! ;biggrin

    West Brom were rubbish. Parking the bus at home to a team struggling with confidence defies belief.

    Barracks mention of Hartson and Kitson is all very well but they were being supplied with opportunities, Carroll and Hernandez are not.

    I think most of us would have taken a point and a clean sheet but this was probably an opportunity missed.

    The home crowd were atrocious and actually booed Ginge when he went off with an obvious hamstring issue, he even reacted against that.

    Best part of the afternoon came when two guys were being marched out by stewards from the home fans seats down by the away fans to a chorus of ;quaver cheerio, cheerio, cheerio ;quaver when one of them looked up, smiled and unzipped his top to reveal his West Han shirt. There was much laughter and cheering, a real funny moment.
  • FlorinRaducliousFlorinRaduclious
    Lukerz, agree heartedly with all your comment there except that all of our goals being purely 'fortunate'.

    I feel we did play into WBA/Pulis' hands a bit with our formation and play, yet at the same time very pleased to see us stop conceding silly goals so I'm a bit conflicted!

    First half though I agree Ant was our only creative option aside from knocking it up for Carroll, and that simply isn't enough to cause ruptions in a defence as tightly drilled as Pullis' Albion. Seriously though, how bad and negative were they for a 'home' side?! I don't think I've ever seen a side at home to us be so negative - we aren't exactly MCity - poor WBA fans if they have that every week.

    I disagree with a few here as I think Arnie showed promise when he came on the field and I think he can be a good player for us on that left wing, that we have struggled to fill since that french urchin left us.
  • FlorinRaducliousFlorinRaduclious
    Going back to the Foster incident, I'm still not sure if it was fully deserving a red card. However, I fully believe if the same 'tackle' had been committed by an outfield player the ref would have been reaching for his red so quickly he would have pulled a muscle in his arm.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    Slaven said it wasn't a red in the post-match, it wasn't two footed, there were two defenders back. Yellow
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Lunge with both feet off the ground. Red
  • Jorderz_Moyes_will_be_MoyesJorderz_Moyes_will_be_Moyes
    His foot was almost at Hernandez's knee. Bewildered anybody could think that isn't a red.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    IronHerb said:

    Lunge with both feet off the ground. Red

    Foster did not have both feet off the ground, his left leg was out, his right leg was underneath him. His foot was level with the ball and he clipped Hernandez's foot not his knee.

    Slaven watched the replays and he thinks it wasn't a red. I agree with him.

    https://highlightsfootball.com/video/west-bromwich-albion-vs-west-ham-united-highlights-full-match/4/
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    I watched Goals on Sunday and they freeze framed it with showing feet off the ground.
  • whupathmanwhupathman
    It would have been a red for an outfield player, but just happy to be out of the bottom 3, how bad are everton with all that money spent.
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    Decent point, poor game that's the way it goes sometimes, people wanted us to stop leaking goals and we have

    Wasn't a red, ball was going away from the goal and players back, barely touched him, wasn't impressed with Reid's reaction or Hernadez rolling around as if shot

  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    Disagree about the red.

    It has nothing to do with a goal scoring opportunity; it is to do with endangering an opponent, which is why Luiz was sent off for an almost identical challenge yesterday.

    He comes out of his area, out of control with his foot up at shin height, studs showing; it doesn't matter how much or little contact is made, it should be a red.
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    edited September 2017
    Wasn't an identical challenge at all Luiz went over the top with an out of control lunge that could've broken the lads leg

    Foster was coming from a different angle and was a typical keepers "I'm committed but might not get there in time" challenge

    Completely different scenarios one may of been to cynically stop a forward the other was to go through someone and do some damage.

    Hence the refs got it right on both counts in my opinion

    ;ok
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    edited September 2017
    That's your opinion, but I disagree. Looked identical to me.

    Any time a player's foot is up, going studs in to another player, I think that's a red.

    Imagining the intentions of the player is irrelevant. Did Mane mean to do serious damage to the Citeh keeper? Almost certainly not. Was it a red? Yes, every time.

    Not sure what difference it being a keeper making the challenge should make.
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    If it's good enough for Slav, it's good enough for me, even if he did get carried away initially

    More disappointed with some of our players reactions than the refs decision tbh
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    If it's good enough for Slav, it's good enough for me
    Well, unless you are never going to doubt or disagree with anything he says/does in future, that really isn't much of an argument, is it?
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    Slaven_Cups_His_Beard said:


    More disappointed with some of our players reactions than the refs decision tbh

    I was actually quite impressed that once the ref told them to step back, they did (or so it seemed from the stream I was watching).
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    edited September 2017
    Who said I'd agree with everything in the future? In this case after his initial reaction (card waving at the 4th official - don't agree with that at all!) then when he saw it again he agreed with the ref and that a yellow was right and I happen to agree with him

    Just a shame that the ref had to remind Reid and the others to take a step back, he was clearly counting how many Hammers were in his face. Reid didn't really stop though, heat of the moment probably but not sure he had to run 50 yards to do that, there again other clubs seem to lap it up, just doesn't sit well for me

    ;ok
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited September 2017
    Wasn't Reid the captain? He's entitled to ask the ref for an explanation, and doesn't have to 'step back' when there's a bunch of players around the ref.
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    Yes he was.....

    I just didn't like the way we acted in that scenario, even our manager got carried away
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    Slizzy

    No one said you would agree with everything Slav said in the future.

    That was rather my point.

  • Jorderz_Moyes_will_be_MoyesJorderz_Moyes_will_be_Moyes
    I don't blame players for getting carried away when they think a tackle is dangerous/reckless and has endangered a team-mate.

    It's different when you're trying to get somebody booked/sent off for something like handball, where a team-mate wasn't endangered. Then it's not very classy surrounding the referee.

    Foster was high and out of control, and I'm glad we tried to get him sent off. Hernandez could have been out for the season if he'd been caught.
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    Sorry perhaps it's just me, "but tried to get him sent off" doesn't sit well.....

    Each to their own

  • Jorderz_Moyes_will_be_MoyesJorderz_Moyes_will_be_Moyes
    As I say, there's two different scenarios IMO.

    One is that a dangerous tackle has endangered a team-mate's season, in which case I'm glad our captain and other players were livid.

    The other is when an opponent hasn't done anything dangerous, and you're surrounding the referee to get him sent off purely to get a sporting advantage.

    In my opinion what happened with Foster and Hernandez comes under the first scenario, which is why I think it was justifiable for our players to be angry.
  • Slaven_Cups_His_BeardSlaven_Cups_His_Beard
    While Foster is out and doesn't make it, I'm not sure how much contact there was if any. I think Hernandez made a bit of a meal
    Of it.

    Now if it had been a david Luiz type scenario then of course I'd expect us to protect our own
  • SuzanneClaretSuzanneClaret
    I think Hernandez did make a meal of it (don't like that either) but I don't think it has any bearing on it being a red.
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    Slizzy

    I don't think either intent or contact come into it.

    fp1


    fp2
  • NEoldironNEoldiron
    edited September 2017
    Grey, I don't know myself, but is that correct that neither intent nor contact come into it? All the examples you've posted seem to show some contact.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    It's one of those decisions that allows a degree of judgement from the ref.

    I don't think if he HAD given a red, and West Brom had appealed it, it would have been overturned, as it wouldn't have been an 'obvious error' on the part of the ref.

    For me, I would just like improvements in consistency of decision-making.
  • NEoldironNEoldiron
    The "endangering the safety of an opponent" is not really clear. If it said "endangering or risk of endangering the safety etc." then contact does not have to be made.
  • grey_til_I_dyegrey_til_I_dye
    NE

    My interpretation, but I can't see what else it could mean. If a player manages to get his leg out of the way or not, surely the endangering is the same?

    We've all seen players sent off when contact wasn't made, or was minimal, but the action was deemed reckless.


    fha1


    fha2

    That isn't, imo, a player in control, and is a player lunging with excessive force and endangering his opponent.

    What would have happened to Hernandez if Foster had made full contact?
This discussion has been closed.