|
|
Post by zeke on Aug 20, 2017 14:56:27 GMT
HT 1-1
Terrible performance. Losing Reynolds with a head injury in the first 10 mins didn't help. Officiating poor. Couldn't string a pass together for over 30 mins. Our target man seemed to be our keeper.
Att 572
Must be 100+ in the bar
|
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Aug 20, 2017 16:45:15 GMT
Their keeper should have been off. Poor refereeing.
Poor performance overall by City. The Snape effect is clearly setting in.
|
|
|
|
Post by zeke on Aug 20, 2017 17:05:37 GMT
The fact you were there and paying towards Snape's wages, means you're either a wind up merchant or an idiot. Seeing as a wind up involves more than repeating the same old tired accusations, I'm voting for the second answer
|
|
|
|
Post by The sound and the fury on Aug 20, 2017 17:08:30 GMT
Still trying to fathom how the keeper stayed on for stopping a goal bound effort with his hands while outside the box. Interested to hear the referee's justification. He's sent off Birch despite not having seen it and without consulting his linesman, then not sent off the Chasetown 16 for an identical offence which he did see, then not sent off the Chasetown 2 for several bookable offences. Refereeing ineptitude of the worst form.
|
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Aug 20, 2017 17:26:57 GMT
The fact you were there and paying towards Snape's wages, means you're either a wind up merchant or an idiot. Seeing as a wind up involves more than repeating the same old tired accusations, I'm voting for the second answer I'm paying towards the players wages too. You're calling me an idiot for that? Snape will find a way of getting his money whether fans turn up to the game or not. The lads won't. Boycotting the club isn't the answer. |
|
|
|
Post by zeke on Aug 20, 2017 17:28:32 GMT
The officials were abysmal. Even by this level's standard. Keeper definitely should have been sent off. Birch should not.
Doesn't take away from the fact that we were terrible. No shape, couldn't pass and tackled with alarming frequency.
|
|
|
|
Post by The sound and the fury on Aug 20, 2017 17:32:52 GMT
Took the midfield quite a while to work out the outlets after Reyno went off, and it wasn't until Birley started getting into the game that we started playing. Not in the game for 40 mins but were on top when the equaliser came. Second half even but punctuated by atrocious officialdom. Mr Dadley did rather badly in fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by zeke on Aug 20, 2017 17:33:20 GMT
The fact you were there and paying towards Snape's wages, means you're either a wind up merchant or an idiot. Seeing as a wind up involves more than repeating the same old tired accusations, I'm voting for the second answer I'm paying towards the players wages too. You're calling me an idiot for that? Snape will find a way of getter by his money whether fans turn up to the game or not. The lads won't. Boycotting the club isn't the answer. If I had the same obsession about Snape as you do, I would definitely boycot the games. Fortunately I have never been so overwhelmingly obsessed by someone That I had so much hatred for |
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Aug 20, 2017 17:48:45 GMT
I'm paying towards the players wages too. You're calling me an idiot for that? Snape will find a way of getter by his money whether fans turn up to the game or not. The lads won't. Boycotting the club isn't the answer. If I had the same obsession about Snape as you do, I would definitely boycot the games. Fortunately I have never been so overwhelmingly obsessed by someone That I had so much hatred for Already explained my logic. Not my problem you can't understand that. |
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Aug 20, 2017 18:12:54 GMT
Fair result. Excellent crowd for this level. Quite an entertaining game, although quality was lacking in the final third. The ref was poor, although both sides were leaving their foot in, and rolling about when caught. City have to be much smarter with refs like this. It developed into a tit for tat game, he booked one of ours, he booked one of theirs. City players have to think about in game management, and not giving refs an excuse. City players kept getting involved, and showed poor discipline and control.
Birch deserved to see red for a stupid late challenge in a niggly game. Their keeper should have gone for handling outside the box. Snape and Hughes did very well with the substitutions. Brett gave his all coming on for Reynolds and scoring a neat finish, Danks and Griffiths were both seeing the red mist and were both correctly removed with red cards imminent.
To get a draw after being down to 10 was a decent effort. Hopefully Reynolds will be fit for the replay, as Chasetown looked iffy at defending in open play, and if City just stick to playing football they should win the replay.
|
|
stamoo
First Teamer
Posts: 349
|
Post by stamoo on Aug 20, 2017 18:45:40 GMT
I am totally mystified why people on here are claiming this was a poor performance by City? I thought that considering we had Dave Reynolds taken off injured and then for a large part of the game we were down to 10 men the lads did very well indeed to get a draw against an unscrupulous, hardworking team from a higher division.
It's true that we often didn't pass the ball around as well as we did against Heanor and Wulfrunians but that was because we were up against a much better side who chased, harried and pressed and gave us a lot less time on the ball. The result was we were often forced into hurried passes or passing back to the keeper. It was more to do with Chasetown closing us down rather than poor play by City.
We could/should have been a goal down in the first 30 seconds.
I am also puzzled why no one is claiming a penalty for when their keeper collided with Dave Reynolds. The fact is the keeper came charging out like a tank and flatted Dave. The keeper didn't get the ball.. It was a reckless and dangerous challenge and a clear penalty in my view.
I agree their keeper should have been given a red for handling outside the area to stop a goalbound shot, all the red had to do was apply the law.
I thought Matt Birley had a wonderful game especially second half, he really put a shift in. I also thought Mark Smith had a good game in defence and rarely put a foot wrong.
I was impressed by Aaron Brett, obviously raw and very young but his control was good, he has an eye for a pass and he scored the equaliser. He was often on his own up against the Chasetown back four, he did well and looks a good prospect.
All in all I thought a creditable performance - AND we are still undefeated!
|
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Aug 20, 2017 18:53:13 GMT
Goodness me that was a tiring game to watch!
I think losing Reynolds was the real blow and like someone said, we relied on Matt Birley to be an outlet to attack through.
Will be interesting to see if Reynolds or their keeper return on Tuesday, as both had stitches.
Good crowd today. The main stand were certainly vocal!
|
|
|
|
Post by jupu on Aug 20, 2017 19:10:10 GMT
The incident that led to Reynolds and their keeper going off wasn't a penalty, it was a case of two players running into each other and banging heads.
But yes, their sub keeper should have had a red card. Surely a keeper using his hand outside the penalty area to stop the ball going into the goal is a sending off offence?
I can only think the ref chose to be lenient because the keeper is a young lad.
|
|
|
|
Post by glevumblues on Aug 20, 2017 22:22:20 GMT
Not our best performance but we certainly have a lot of spirit. Chasetown were undoubtedly the best team in the first half but we matched them in the second. A couple of points.Interesting that the keeper came out with arms outstretched when he collided with Reynolds as the ball was on the floor. Seconds before Chasetown scored, one of their players stuck his knee into Hayward's chest but the ref saw nothing. Regarding the substitute keeper, is it not a red card when a keeper deliberately handles outside the box AND when any player who is the last defender commits a foul? If the ref claims it was ball to hand, why did he give even a free kick? Not that I'm biased in any way!
|
|
|
|
Post by Croc on Aug 20, 2017 22:38:54 GMT
If I had the same obsession about Snape as you do, I would definitely boycot the games. Fortunately I have never been so overwhelmingly obsessed by someone That I had so much hatred for Already explained my logic. Not my problem you can't understand that. Actually you haven't - logic with you has been as evident as WMDs in Saddam's garden shed or sensible decisions from Hampson, Hallmark and co. What you've spewed forth are a load of vague allegations and statements of hate and malpractice with no actual supporting evidence. So don't be playing the victim card - as wise men once said "Publish or be damned" and "s*** or get off the pot" |
|
|
|
Post by citytoon on Aug 20, 2017 22:43:22 GMT
Chasetown's goal:
|
|
|
|
Post by jupu on Aug 20, 2017 22:57:19 GMT
 Photo by Chris Till |
|
|
|
Post by Tim Munslow on Aug 21, 2017 15:37:38 GMT
You couldn't give a penalty for that! However, the goalie handling outside the box is a definite red: being lenient just because the goalie is a young lad is not on.
I thought the red card for Birch was very harsh: a similar challenge five minutes later by a Chasetown player only merited a yellow. Very inconsistent refereeing.
We did well to survive really: they missed an excellent chance in the first minute and another similar one late on. Winners of the replay away to Wolverhampton Casuals or Boldmere St Michaels.
|
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Aug 21, 2017 16:21:11 GMT
Already explained my logic. Not my problem you can't understand that. Actually you haven't - logic with you has been as evident as WMDs in Saddam's garden shed or sensible decisions from Hampson, Hallmark and co. What you've spewed forth are a load of vague allegations and statements of hate and malpractice with no actual supporting evidence. So don't be playing the victim card - as wise men once said "Publish or be damned" and "s*** or get off the pot" He asked me why I bought tickets to matches despite my feelings towards John Snape, and I explained my reasons for doing so. How does not qualify as logic? You can disagree with my logic, but it's still my logic. As such, your WMD comparison makes no sense. The other stuff you talked about isn't relevant to this discussion. Though ironically, I have explained those too. |
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Aug 21, 2017 16:33:17 GMT
The thing is though Genghis, we don't take any notice of the accusations you make against Our Heavenly Father John Snape, mainly because you make so many wild and varied accusations. Therefore, we all think you are as nutty as a fruitcake, and laugh at you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Aug 21, 2017 16:37:37 GMT
"Sack the Board!!" because they have overseen and been party to the biggest decline and failure of the company in over 100 years, broke, homeless, and dropped three leagues, and still failing.
" No! Sack John Snape!!" because he has a poo and doesnt pull the chain after !!
|
|
|
|
Post by leejackson345 on Aug 21, 2017 16:45:40 GMT
Anyone driving to the replay tomorrow and have space please?
|
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Aug 21, 2017 17:59:00 GMT
The thing is though Genghis, we don't take any notice of the accusations you make against Our Heavenly Father John Snape, mainly because you make so many wild and varied accusations. Therefore, we all think you are as nutty as a fruitcake, and laugh at you. If you weren't taking notice, you wouldn't reply. Instead, I seem to be personally attacked for my views and users such as thatloudbloke defend John Snape relentlessly. As Mahatma Gandhi once said: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." The users of this site just clearly skipped the first step. "Sack the Board!!" because they have overseen and been party to the biggest decline and failure of the company in over 100 years, broke, homeless, and dropped three leagues, and still failing. " No! Sack John Snape!!" because he has a poo and doesnt pull the chain after !! That was just an example of the juvenile character of John Snape. A character which is not suited to managing a brothel, let alone a football club. If you want to sack the board, I have no objections. What I object to is the complete denial of the culpability of Snape in WCFC's current plight. |
|
Fred
Reserve Teamer
Posts: 129
|
Post by Fred on Aug 21, 2017 18:08:36 GMT
The thing is though Genghis, we don't take any notice of the accusations you make against Our Heavenly Father John Snape, mainly because you make so many wild and varied accusations. Therefore, we all think you are as nutty as a fruitcake, and laugh at you. If you weren't taking notice, you wouldn't reply. Instead, I seem to be personally attacked for my views and users such as thatloudbloke defend John Snape relentlessly. As Mahatma Gandhi once said: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." The users of this site just clearly skipped the first step. "Sack the Board!!" because they have overseen and been party to the biggest decline and failure of the company in over 100 years, broke, homeless, and dropped three leagues, and still failing. " No! Sack John Snape!!" because he has a poo and doesnt pull the chain after !! That was just an example of the juvenile character of John Snape. A character which is not suited to managing a brothel, let alone a football club. If you want to sack the board, I have no objections. What I object to is the complete denial of the culpability of Snape in WCFC's current plight. Just like you came on and in your first post...and every post since have "personally attacked" John Snape ? And your 1 post mate who did the same ? Try making 1 post on this site without mentioning his name or making any reference to him....maybe then me and a number of others can start to take your views on board. Give us your views on the game and the referee decisions etc |
|
|
|
Post by Croc on Aug 21, 2017 18:12:34 GMT
The thing is though Genghis, we don't take any notice of the accusations you make against Our Heavenly Father John Snape, mainly because you make so many wild and varied accusations. Therefore, we all think you are as nutty as a fruitcake, and laugh at you. If you weren't taking notice, you wouldn't reply. Instead, I seem to be personally attacked for my views and users such as thatloudbloke defend John Snape relentlessly. As Mahatma Gandhi once said: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." The users of this site just clearly skipped the first step. "Sack the Board!!" because they have overseen and been party to the biggest decline and failure of the company in over 100 years, broke, homeless, and dropped three leagues, and still failing. " No! Sack John Snape!!" because he has a poo and doesnt pull the chain after !! That was just an example of the juvenile character of John Snape. A character which is not suited to managing a brothel, let alone a football club. If you want to sack the board, I have no objections. What I object to is the complete denial of the culpability of Snape in WCFC's current plight. I am delighted that you will never get what you want, and you will always be fizzing with impotent rage. |
|
|
|
Post by downthelane on Aug 21, 2017 18:39:09 GMT
Genghis' preferred team selection for yesterday's game:
1. Genghis
2. Genghis
3. Genghis
4. Genghis
5. Genghis
6. Genghis
7. Genghis
8. Genghis (c)
9. Genghis
10. Genghis
11. Genghis
12. Genghis
14. Genghis
15. Genghis
Manager Genghis
Assistant Genghis
Physio Genghis
Kit Man Genghis
Toilet Flusher Genghis
|
|
|
|
Post by crosscountrymark on Aug 21, 2017 19:38:59 GMT
A cup tie full of incidents, in game which could of gone either way and a poor referee who spoilt the game with poor decisions throughout. Worcester matched the higher grade opposition, but missed the threat of Dave Reynolds who left the field with a head injury which needed stitches. Aaron Brett the 16 years old youth product rifled home to level for City to lift the spirits of City fathiful. A draw was a fair result in the end for both sides who both finished the game with 10 men. City had to substitute Aaron Griffiths and Mark Danks to avoid anymore sending offs as the red mist was descending. Matt Birley was my man of the match who had a good game on the right wing, Tyler Weir seem to struggling with injury throughout the game. The replay will be a tough ask of a squad depleted by the loss of Lee Hughes , Reynolds and Shab Khan with Tyler Weir struggling. This will be a test to see how our defence copes away from home, have we got enough up front to nick the tie ? . I hope we can get a good following at Chasetown to cheer the side to victory.
|
|
|
|
Post by zeke on Aug 21, 2017 19:54:35 GMT
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." The users of this site just clearly skipped the first step. We've skipped 1, 3 and 4. Your rantings only deserve step 2 |
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Aug 21, 2017 20:01:34 GMT
If you weren't taking notice, you wouldn't reply. Instead, I seem to be personally attacked for my views and users such as thatloudbloke defend John Snape relentlessly. As Mahatma Gandhi once said: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." The users of this site just clearly skipped the first step. That was just an example of the juvenile character of John Snape. A character which is not suited to managing a brothel, let alone a football club. If you want to sack the board, I have no objections. What I object to is the complete denial of the culpability of Snape in WCFC's current plight. Just like you came on and in your first post...and every post since have "personally attacked" John Snape ? And your 1 post mate who did the same ? Try making 1 post on this site without mentioning his name or making any reference to him....maybe then me and a number of others can start to take your views on board. Give us your views on the game and the referee decisions etc Second post in this thread is mine, and the first thing I talked about was Chasetown's keeper not getting sent off for handling the ball outside the area. This was before anyone else talked about it. I'd have been happy to give a more in-depth analysis of the match. Unfortunately, you and a few others wanted to turn this thread into the clown show. I made one comment on John Snape and that's all you want to pick up on. |
|
Fred
Reserve Teamer
Posts: 129
|
Post by Fred on Aug 21, 2017 20:18:19 GMT
SLOW CLAP SLOW CLAP
Did you read what I put ?
A message that "doesnt" include the name John Snape or any reference to him...your message...the second one in actually mentions him...
|
|
