|
Post by dcpedigree on Sept 6, 2015 21:23:50 GMT
i think if i was a landlord i would have looked at a forum such as this, a couple of cov sorts have been on here talking about crews and legions and wanting a tare up etc that would of made me shut the doors on you guys.
sad as i am sure 99% of you guys are like us. banter bit of fun love a game of football
|
|
|
Post by brewster on Sept 6, 2015 21:29:34 GMT
It was probably enough for any police checking to advise pubs not to let anyone in, never heard of any problems before! Got a few friends from work who are Walsall fans and there already looking forward to coming over for some of the real ale!! like you say it's a shame it ruins the day for some proper fans!!
|
|
|
Post by brewer1874 on Sept 6, 2015 21:29:32 GMT
From a Coventry point of view at the time we got the wineries sure we were offside and goal was lucky to have been allowed but dice then it been shown to be onside and correct to stand. However, If i were a Burton fan I would have been very pissed off at the time. On a positive note, I think you will definitely finish top 10, pity you will get a fine for the glare though. As fir the gate, we thought it was a complete sell out and City Would have brought double if we knew that we would have got tickets. Surely you want gate revenue, I know we would. One negative, why could we not get into some pubs and is some venues made to feel like drunk hooligans? Those of us we can get tickets for these small grounds are all season on ticket holders and not idiots or animals, we enjoy banter but think we respect other teams and there supporters. Those who made the de ions not to,open or allow fans in, list a lot of revenue and did the town of Burton no favours. Good luck with the season and we will welcome you to the Ricoh, our rented home. I'm afraid I disagree with you on a number of points. The police told pubs not to allow away fans in as they knew there were numbers travelling to Burton without match tickets. Why travel when the games on TV. I know this isn't the genuine supporters fault but thems the breaks I'm afraid. Also you never even sold out your own allocation so why should we give you more? It's a Burton home game and you were noisy enough as it is!!!! All in all good game, controversial winner and we move on. See you in January at the rugby ground.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2015 21:49:21 GMT
I don't know about the others but I had a cracking day!!
I did tell you about our goalkeeper Burge, Burton fans. Funniest thing is that's not even him at his worst
|
|
|
Post by NobodyGood on Sept 6, 2015 22:22:24 GMT
I don't know about the others but I had a cracking day!! I did tell you about our goalkeeper Burge, Burton fans. Funniest thing is that's not even him at his worst Highlights how much we miss a poaching striker really! Good game Though some good footy on display
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2015 22:53:24 GMT
I think Sky's slo mo has shown that the flicker was onside, as he was level with the guy who chested it towards the goal. Jon Mc flapping and missing compounded an earlier error I think. It's clear that people do not understand the offside law, but admittedly it is a difficult one and annual amendments do not help. A player (the flicker) cannot be onside simply because he is level with his own teammate (the chester, whose actual last touch was off his foot). There has to be 2 defenders between him and the goal. BUT, on further review neither were offside when Murphy crossed the ball. But, the chester/footer was offside when the flicker flicked it. I think. Hey-ho. Anyway, this debate and viewing multiple slo mo replays multiple times really highlights the difficult job that referees and assistant referees have when having to make these difficult decisions in a fraction of a second! Does anyone agree with that last sentence?
|
|
|
Post by brewer1874 on Sept 6, 2015 23:21:42 GMT
I think Sky's slo mo has shown that the flicker was onside, as he was level with the guy who chested it towards the goal. Jon Mc flapping and missing compounded an earlier error I think. It's clear that people do not understand the offside law, but admittedly it is a difficult one and annual amendments do not help. A player (the flicker) cannot be onside simply because he is level with his own teammate (the chester, whose actual last touch was off his foot). There has to be 2 defenders between him and the goal. BUT, on further review neither were offside when Murphy crossed the ball. But, the chester/footer was offside when the flicker flicked it. I think. Hey-ho. Anyway, this debate and viewing multiple slo mo replays multiple times really highlights the difficult job that referees and assistant referees have when having to make these difficult decisions in a fraction of a second! Does anyone agree with that last sentence? The definitive offside was from the header to the boy who chested it back across goal. The rest is up for debate due to inconclusive camera angles. Keeper should have done better and we should have taken our chances.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 6:29:39 GMT
I think Sky's slo mo has shown that the flicker was onside, as he was level with the guy who chested it towards the goal. Jon Mc flapping and missing compounded an earlier error I think. It's clear that people do not understand the offside law, but admittedly it is a difficult one and annual amendments do not help. A player (the flicker) cannot be onside simply because he is level with his own teammate (the chester, whose actual last touch was off his foot). There has to be 2 defenders between him and the goal. BUT, on further review neither were offside when Murphy crossed the ball. But, the chester/footer was offside when the flicker flicked it. I think. Hey-ho. Anyway, this debate and viewing multiple slo mo replays multiple times really highlights the difficult job that referees and assistant referees have when having to make these difficult decisions in a fraction of a second! Does anyone agree with that last sentence? In respect of the offside law, if the flicker is level with the ball or behind it when it is played by the chester, he cannot be offside, it is irrelevant how many opponent are nearer the goal. From the replays that is likely the case. It is also likely that the Chester was onside when the cross was made. The whole thing is marginal. "A player is in an offside position if: he is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent" Read more at www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/laws/football-11-11/law-11---offside.aspx#kP4C3dFIExx5zA6R.99I agree with your penultimate sentence.
|
|
|
Post by insideleft on Sept 7, 2015 7:20:29 GMT
Getting back to the game....................our strength has been our back 4 for a long . Why on earth did Jimmy feel then need to change it ? It was a good game, Jimmy likes lots of pressing, closing down, high tempo etc and he got just that but you do need a bit of craft in the last third and.......................
|
|
|
Post by evans1883 on Sept 7, 2015 7:38:10 GMT
PS... the attendance figure seems off btw , looked near enough a full house barring a couple hundred
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 8:27:46 GMT
Back on the 'offside goal', there are three areas of interest…
I have now watched it umpteen times.
Area one - as the cross is made from the left hand side. All players are CLEARLY onside (SCS is the deepest of the defenders clearly playing all attacking players ON).
Second area - Is the ball headed on by the number 4 (he eventually scored)? If he did, then the 21 who chested/fumbled it towards goal would be offside. He did NOT, therefore 21 is ONSIDE because he was when the cross was made.
Third area - Is the goal scorer (the guy that flicked it on the line offside? Well no, as it comes down 21 (the chester) it comes off his thigh/knee and goes towards the goal, as it does so, the number 4 (scorer/flicker) is level with, or probably behind the ball. NOT therefore offside as he is behind/level with the ball.
|
|
|
Post by observer on Sept 7, 2015 9:17:17 GMT
PS... the attendance figure seems off btw , looked near enough a full house barring a couple hundred That's what the radio commentators said But we were only two thirds full apparently
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 9:30:54 GMT
I took the attached pic to demonstrate that there here was loads of room on the pop side this is the space next to me. And Coventry didn't sell out their full allocation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 9:32:09 GMT
By the way the speakers packed up again as well :-D
|
|
|
Post by Norah on Sept 7, 2015 10:16:05 GMT
What was said by a group of Coventry fans was that they had arrived late to stand in behind the goal and the area was full already. I explained that like all grounds the stands had been through a full analysis by Health & Safety bods at the time of opening and a capacity assigned to every section.
Two thoughts occur on this... I am sure that Coventry fans aren't used to being packed into a standing section and don't have the skills that we do in weaving between groups and finding that less than obvious hole in the crowd. As the capacity had not been reached then those there already needed to move up the bus so to speak. It may be slightly naff having to make an announcement to that effect but if fans spill over onto the walkways which is not allowed then that is surely worse. The only other time that this comment has been heard by me was after the Port Vale game at Christmas when 'boisterous' fans didn't help or want to help their own cause. This i think is different but with bigger away crowds expected should be thought about by the club as it must not become a regular issue.
A couple of other remarks at concerning the Coventry fans. I heard a lot of moans about the distance from the railway station to the ground being too far and the ground being way out of town... how laughable. I met a ground hopper from Nuneaton who was a Newcastle fan (?) who said the same and that he, "..wouldn't bother coming again.." to which I replied, "don't worry we won't miss you" in the nicest voice possible. And those who were in the pub postgame were no problem at all. I even deigned to say that we deserved a point but at the end of the day they score all three goals so possibly edged it on that alone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 10:35:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by evans1883 on Sept 7, 2015 10:52:24 GMT
No we didnt .. club sold just shy of 1800 and in the end we had 1900 .. so around 100 or so short , just looking around looked pretty full .the away terracing was extremely full i could see a few seats on the side stand to the left of me where coventry fans were. To be honest i am not used to terracing like this , the last time was at walsall in the late 90s so for me it's diffucult to judge how many are in attendance . But it certainly looked like you had more than 2800 or so in your ends
|
|
|
Post by cbh1 on Sept 7, 2015 11:14:49 GMT
To be fair, when I looked around the stands in the moments before the teams came out then I was surprised and perhaps slightly disappointed by how much room there still appeared to be in the West Stand (home end). That was far from being packed out, particularly in the end sections. As Funky has shown with his photo there were certainly sections of the Popside where it was not packed at all and there was also a decent chunk taken out of that side of the ground for Sky's 'studio'. The home end also had a camera gantry in it which would have slightly reduced the capacity of that stand.
Speakers - I was hoping to speak with Mike from the club who has been co-ordinating the task of sorting this out but I didnt see him to speak to in the end as yesterday was rather busy. I know after the previous game there were still discussions taking place with the company tasked with fixing it and Mike was trying to get them to the next game. Difficult to assess yesterday to be fair as well as we have to pander to Sky and their insistence on keeping levels relatively low to avoid drowning out their pundits as it is not possible to isolate individual speakers in the North ie above their studio due to them all being on a loop. It may seem that nothing is being done but I can assure people that it is still being looked at. Obviously not a quick fix but then I am no electrical expert.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 13:12:26 GMT
Several people said the same wrt the attendance announced, but there was a lot of space on the popside and quite a bit behind our goal. Speakers stopped working as the players walked out onto the pitch and started again in added time in the first half. From this vid it seems the refs got it spot on... Cov goal.mp4 (828.58 KB)
|
|
|
Post by observer on Sept 7, 2015 13:23:04 GMT
How did we accommodate 1900 Cov Fans
I've read that the away terrace holds 1200 so did we give them 700 seats?
|
|