Tottenham Hotspur 1 Chelsea 4

[Backbiter]

VAR looked at this and decided Jackson was impeding the keeper's view of Caicedo's shot.

[Ham]

1 minute ago, Backbiter said:

VAR looked at this and decided Jackson was impeding the keeper's view of Caicedo's shot.

It's absolute bollocks. Look how far the ball had to travel! 

Caicedo won't score many as good as that. 

[Leo]

11 hours ago, JaneB said:

Are you Leo from the old site?

If so, welcome back 🤗

Hi Jane I am!! Had to create a new account! Good first game back! 😁

[Dwmh]

4 hours ago, martin1905 said:

It happened constantly, even in the first half. The players weren't trying to jump back onside, they were just aimlessly wondering around offside, when we had the ball, countless times. 

Aimlessly wandering exactly, if they had sprinted a second earlier that would get praise for effort.  
What they should have done was to set off and sprint the first 20 yards at 2 second gaps so that any idiot defender could find one of them with a pass.  

1 hour ago, Backbiter said:

VAR looked at this and decided Jackson was impeding the keeper's view of Caicedo's shot.

It goes through his legs, a keeper had to pause for a deflection off either leg in either direction.  Clear interference.  No question.

I can't really believe the efforts being made to imply the ref was biased against us in a game where we got a penalty and 2 Spurs players were sent off.  Liverpool levels of victimhood.  Ref was excellent.  VAR was superb.  VAR system protected the players against an over agressive Spurs in a way that Clattenberg and no VAR never did.

[martin1905]

39 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Aimlessly wandering exactly, if they had sprinted a second earlier that would get praise for effort.  
What they should have done was to set off and sprint the first 20 yards at 2 second gaps so that any idiot defender could find one of them with a pass.  

It goes through his legs, a keeper had to pause for a deflection off either leg in either direction.  Clear interference.  No question.

I can't really believe the efforts being made to imply the ref was biased against us in a game where we got a penalty and 2 Spurs players were sent off.  Liverpool levels of victimhood.  Ref was excellent.  VAR was superb.  VAR system protected the players against an over agressive Spurs in a way that Clattenberg and no VAR never did.

Agreed, it was annoying and long but it worked almost as well as it could last night.

The only thing they got wrong, in my opinion was the first Udogie 'challenge' which for me is one of the worst decisions in the short history of VAR.

 

[Blue Moon]

What a bonus. Spuds U21s beaten 4:1 by my second club - Cambridge United. Spuds seem to have a thing about being beaten 4:1.

Edited November 7, 2023 by Blue Moon

[chara]

Impeding the keeper..such a grey area and one that infuriates me.... if a player is in and around the box he is in the keepers "awareness" so at any given time even if not in direct line the player is affecting the keepers game. Who is to judge in anything but the most obvious case if the keeper is being unsighted or impeded visually.

Aside..for all the anti Chelsea (villians and/or incompetents) criticism they won..which is what the game is about...if Chelsea had imploded as Spurs did I would have been furious and not hailed them as heroes and noble losers...a disgraceful exhibition by pro players and having caused their own downfall their fans are happy with such behaviour?

And H/T Citeh 3-0 up...most of second half against ten men..final result 3-0,,not exactly apples and apples but just saying.

 

[Backbiter]

1 hour ago, Dwmh said:

Aimlessly wandering exactly, if they had sprinted a second earlier that would get praise for effort.  
What they should have done was to set off and sprint the first 20 yards at 2 second gaps so that any idiot defender could find one of them with a pass.  

It goes through his legs, a keeper had to pause for a deflection off either leg in either direction.  Clear interference.  No question.

I can't really believe the efforts being made to imply the ref was biased against us in a game where we got a penalty and 2 Spurs players were sent off.  Liverpool levels of victimhood.  Ref was excellent.  VAR was superb.  VAR system protected the players against an over agressive Spurs in a way that Clattenberg and no VAR never did.

Var bottled two red cards in the first half. They allowed a player to stay on the field who then commited a dangerous foul on our player.  They decided that it is permissible to kick a player if it's deemed petulant. They didn't recommend a red for  a dangerous two-footed out-of-control potential ankle breaker. 

The disallowed Caicedo goal should be compared with numerous other that have stood where players were far more obviously obstructing the keeper's line of vision. The law states a player has to 'be clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision'. That was not the case with Jackson, as the picture shows. Being a potential distraction to a keeper is rarely seen as grounds for interfering with play from an offside position. 

Saying that, I doubt VAR would have recommended a red for Romero if they had let the Caicedo goal stand.

[Backbiter]

Quote

The Spurs support drank in the spirit of adventure and there was a remarkable moment after Son’s miss. When Chelsea went up to the other end to make it 3-1 through Nicolas Jackson, the home fans stood to applaud their players.

"It was unbelievable, honestly,” Kulusevski said. “Some things are bigger than life, bigger than football, bigger than the wins. Honestly, I was really proud of that moment and the fans. 

DVDs of the standing ovation are to go on sale in time for Christmas.

[JaneB]

3 hours ago, Leo said:

Hi Jane I am!! Had to create a new account! Good first game back! 😁

This is great 🙂 

You might have done this already but if you go on the Forum Announcements and News topic and then on the Cfcnet So Far thread, you will see what happened back in January and why we had to start again.

Thanks to the wonderful Sam @My Blood Is Blue the new site is a million times better than the old one and it's all ours!!!

[Dwmh]

10 minutes ago, Backbiter said:

Var bottled two red cards in the first half. They allowed a player to stay on the field who then commited a dangerous foul on our player.  They decided that it is permissible to kick a player if it's deemed petulant. They didn't recommend a red for  a dangerous two-footed out-of-control potential ankle breaker. 

 

The Romereo first on Colwille was never going to be a red at any time in the last 5 years.
The foul on Sterling was probable but not certain as Red.  Particularly since Sterling rolled over and over despite not being actually touched.  (I was pleased they both went down like a ton of bricks, but if the ref sees no contact it doesn't actually help.  By contrast Enzo stayed on his feet - he needs to learn how to play like a S American).

Caicedo's shot  went  between jackson's feet.  End of.

I get the frustration - with the team, the strikers, with Poch.  But with the ref??

[Backbiter]

13 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

The Romereo first on Colwille was never going to be a red at any time in the last 5 years.
The foul on Sterling was probable but not certain as Red.  Particularly since Sterling rolled over and over despite not being actually touched.  (I was pleased they both went down like a ton of bricks, but if the ref sees no contact it doesn't actually help.  By contrast Enzo stayed on his feet - he needs to learn how to play like a S American).

Caicedo's shot  went  between jackson's feet.  End of.

I get the frustration - with the team, the strikers, with Poch.  But with the ref??

Kicking a player is generally red carded. Son got sent off (by Taylor of all refs) for exactly that against us the other year.

As for the Udogie's two- footer, the law is clear: 

Quote

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play."

Serious foul play is a red card offence.

The law also says:

Quote

Sending-off offences include (but are not limited to):

• delaying the restart of play by the opposing team e.g. holding onto the ball, kicking the ball away, obstructing the movement of a player
• deliberately leaving the technical area to:
  • show dissent towards, or remonstrate with, a match official
  • act in a provocative or inflammatory manner
• enter the opposing technical area in an aggressive or confrontational manner
• deliberately throwing/kicking an object onto the field of play
• entering the field of play to:
  • confront a match official (including at half-time and full-time)
  • interfere with play, an opposing player or a match official
• entering the video operation room (VOR)
• physical or aggressive behaviour (including spitting or biting) towards an opposing player, 

It does NOT say that petulant kicks are ok. Last night's VAR team made that up.

On an unrelated point, the above wording makes it clear that  Maupay of Brentford should have been red carded for entering the field of play and kicking the ball as Palmer was about to take a free kick. The ref obviously didn't apply the above law correctly, Maupay later came on as sub and set up the game-clinching second goal.

Edited November 7, 2023 by Backbiter

[Ham]

1 hour ago, martin1905 said:

Agreed, it was annoying and long but it worked almost as well as it could last night.

The only thing they got wrong, in my opinion was the first Udogie 'challenge' which for me is one of the worst decisions in the short history of VAR.

 

You're forgetting Romero's hair pull last season.

 

[Dwmh]

17 minutes ago, Backbiter said:

Kicking a player is generally red carded. Son got sent off (by Taylor of all refs) for exactly that against us the other year.

You can see it in the video not far down in here.
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/11894099/tottenham-appeal-heung-min-son-red-card-against-chelsea
Not the same at all he was kicking Rudiger in the ribs not the back of the leg.  With his studs not his laces.

 

[ROTG]

Usual heads coming above the parapet after a win

Hopefully fully communications will be restored to the parish today and can get to watch the game some point. 

From read here and the press, seem same old problems of equalising from a penalty when 10vs11 and then taking in excess of 20 minutes to score a goal in open play with 9vs11 and Ange's team defending on the halfway line and poch using Dave Bassett Wimbledon tactics. 

A win is a win regardless and 3 points against the spuds is alway sweet. 

Toodles. 

[Backbiter]

1 hour ago, Dwmh said:

You can see it in the video not far down in here.
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/11894099/tottenham-appeal-heung-min-son-red-card-against-chelsea
Not the same at all he was kicking Rudiger in the ribs not the back of the leg.  With his studs not his laces.

 

Show me where the law distinguishes between a kick in the ribs and a kick on the back of the leg.

[Floyd25]

Regarding Spurs celebrating losing 4-1, believe me when I say they are the only fan base in the prem that behave like this, baring maybe Liverpool fans at times. 
 

What are they proud of and what are the media so impressed by? They threw the game away in comical fashion and were tactically a complete mess, wow how commendable….their high line with nine men was something from the Sunday league, I don’t understand football anymore. 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Floyd25

[kev61]

23 hours ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

So much negativity on here after a 4-1 away against an unbeaten Spurs side… come on guys, just enjoy the win!

I was getting frustrated with our struggles to break 9 men down, but we did and once we did, we got a couple more as well! Ultimately, it’s a great result.

Spurs went all Spursy and completely imploded in spectacular style, even though we’re the far less experienced side. It’s hilarious! Then they continued to play a suicidal high line…. Bonkers.

Jackson hat trick, Palmer continuing to be our best player and no brain farts from the keeper… happy days!

Perfect performance? No. Win against Spurs away? Yes. Very happy!

The first 10/15 mins were horrific though, they came flying out and played at a pace we just could not live with and had it stayed like that, would have been a very long night, however, after the first red that wasn’t given, it seemed to wake us up and we started to get back into the game and probably deserved to draw level.

We’ll never know how it would have finished 11v11, but that isn’t for us to worry about.

I Suppose there is a negative response to the win because we have been less than convincing in nearly all the matches we have played so far - even after a 1-4 win against a 9 man team.

Edited November 8, 2023 by kev61

[My Blood Is Blue]

37 minutes ago, kev61 said:

I Suppose there is a negative response to the win because we have been less than convincing in nearly all the matches we have played so far - even after a 1-4 win against a 9 man team.

Sure, but a 4-1 away win against out unbeaten London rivals should be celebrated regardless. This is a new and young side, the performances aren’t going to be the best every week and neither are results, but this is a big result for them.

[kev61]

I would normally agree - but this team is a bunch of players that have no structure.

Poch looks as if he has no idea where and how he plays them.

Only a matter of time for Poch unfortunately and if I'm wrong I will eat my hat 

[Dwmh]

6 hours ago, Backbiter said:

Show me where the law distinguishes between a kick in the ribs and a kick on the back of the leg.

is this serious?

[Max Fowler]

9 hours ago, Dwmh said:

Caicedo's shot  went  between jackson's feet.  End of.

I get the frustration - with the team, the strikers, with Poch.  But with the ref??

I tend to agree with you in general, Droy. The ref wasn't what won or lost us that game - we should spend our focus on the team's performance. But I thought Caicedo's goal being disallowed was harsh - great strike from him and would love to see more of it (I think he's capable).

Edited November 8, 2023 by Max Fowler

[Max Fowler]

1 hour ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Sure, but a 4-1 away win against out unbeaten London rivals should be celebrated regardless. This is a new and young side, the performances aren’t going to be the best every week and neither are results, but this is a big result for them.

 

 

[kev61]

22 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

 

 

Why is that remotely interesting?

[Max Fowler]

3 minutes ago, kev61 said:

Why is that remotely interesting?

I was about to disagree with MBIB because based on Poch's puffed cheeks reaction after the game, I was unsure whether this result would actually give the boys confidence or just plain relief.

But seeing them celebrating, hopefully this is something we can build on!