• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Wolves 1-2 Man City: Verdict Thread

Great advice from Benitez and co on MOTD when we were struggling in the last 15 minutes. 'Just keep the ball' :D :D

Good one, had never thought of that.
 
I think they were fair enough in pointing out the errors from Guedes and Bellegarde.

And I don't ever want to agree with Rafa Benitez, believe me.
 
WVWolf said:
Well yep, but Man City are chasing a winner and battering you, as they would to most teams, and their advice is 'just keep the ball'.

A lot easier said than done!
Click to expand...
There was a point where we could have tried to force an opening, but Guedes kept the ball, the crowd audibly moaned. But it was the right decision.

Obviously if Guedes gets that free kick near the end we don't lose, it would have been soft but only like about 5 FKs that City had got.

The dive from Kovacic from Lemina's challenge a good example.
 
I thought it was harsh on Guedes - and I think he's shit.

He couldn't go for the corner from that position. He could've had a shot. But nothing to say from the (highly likely missed) shot that they still wouldn't have ended up getting a corner.

Bellegarde's header was terrible, but it's only resulting in a corner, it's not huge in the grand scheme of things.

I just felt it was funny telling us to keep the ball against the best team in the world, as though we hadn't thought of that.
 
Late on parade with my thoughts as I have been out all day.

I have no qualms with the winner. As long as consistency is applied. Which, if the explanation we were given for the disallowed goal for Kilman is to be believed, simply hasn't happened. Chirewa was "in the vicinity", as was Silva. If the contact had been shown on the monitor we may well have got the call (who knows). But the offside is the main issue where consistency has failed to occur. Also, shame the lino delayed the flag as if the ref had blown the whistle before the ball hits the net VAR can do nothing.

I really think we are going to be almost religiously treated like shite by PGMOL for trying to get VAR binned. It is what it is, so we should never expect a decision, and then are pleasantly surprised if one comes along.
 
'We're certainly not here to try to take goals away if we don't need to, but we are pretty consistent here and all over the world in terms of how we judge these types of situations. When you have an offside position player so close in front of the goalkeeper, the established understanding on these is that it has some impact on the ability of the goalkeeper to react. We don't want to be in a world of making judgements of how good the goalkeeper is. Sometimes the ball's quite close to the goalkeeper, sometimes further away. How quickly that goalkeeper normally reacts, how good he is at making those saves is not something that we really want to judge. We can judge the factual matter of the fact that Chirewa is in the line of sight, the goalkeeper really close, really in front of him and also in an offside position. Therefore when we see these situations we expect them to be penalised every time.

I think we want consistency don't we? And we want people to understand through an expectation of what will happen in certain circumstances. We've seen other examples like this in Burnley against Manchester United this season. Crystal Palace, Burnley, almost the same situation where goals are disallowed. And of course, I understand the frustration. This is the last minute. This is an equalising goal that is then celebrated and then through the VAR intervention taken away. But it is in line with the way the laws of the game are applied all over the world. If you stay in that offside position right in front of the goalkeeper, you're going to have an impact. And most goalkeeping people I’ve spoken to at least expect this to be to be penalised.'

Howard Webb on Sky Sports Mic'd Up talking about the Kilman goal.
 
Alan said:
I have to give Gary credit, he finally made a significant change and it’s IMO quite obvious he’s either better at getting across his ideas in that formation or the players really are just more comfortable in those positions.
Click to expand...
Both!
 
Whatever you think of it, he's not in his line of vision, that'll be used as the rationale.
 
Elephant Pyjamas said:
Good article from JP, that many will disagree with aspects of, I assume.

footballunfiltered.substack.com

Wolves’ defeat to City poses more questions:

Uneasy truces all around as Gary O'Neil searches for answers
footballunfiltered.substack.com footballunfiltered.substack.com
Click to expand...
The third and fourth paragraphs are complete bobbins and the penultimate one misses the point spectacularly. The reason we don't sell out has fuck all to do with apathy, pretty spinless of him to not address the real reason
 
Last edited:
Tony Towner said:
The third and fourth paragraphs are complete bobbins and the penultimate one misses the point spectacularly. The reason we don't sell out has fuck all to do with apathy, pretty spinless of him to not address the real reason
Click to expand...

Yep more to do with affordability and people rightfully prioritising other stuff like eating food as opposed to going to football.
 
Lycan said:
'We're certainly not here to try to take goals away if we don't need to, but we are pretty consistent here and all over the world in terms of how we judge these types of situations. When you have an offside position player so close in front of the goalkeeper, the established understanding on these is that it has some impact on the ability of the goalkeeper to react. We don't want to be in a world of making judgements of how good the goalkeeper is. Sometimes the ball's quite close to the goalkeeper, sometimes further away. How quickly that goalkeeper normally reacts, how good he is at making those saves is not something that we really want to judge. We can judge the factual matter of the fact that Chirewa is in the line of sight, the goalkeeper really close, really in front of him and also in an offside position. Therefore when we see these situations we expect them to be penalised every time.

I think we want consistency don't we? And we want people to understand through an expectation of what will happen in certain circumstances. We've seen other examples like this in Burnley against Manchester United this season. Crystal Palace, Burnley, almost the same situation where goals are disallowed. And of course, I understand the frustration. This is the last minute. This is an equalising goal that is then celebrated and then through the VAR intervention taken away. But it is in line with the way the laws of the game are applied all over the world. If you stay in that offside position right in front of the goalkeeper, you're going to have an impact. And most goalkeeping people I’ve spoken to at least expect this to be to be penalised.'

Howard Webb on Sky Sports Mic'd Up talking about the Kilman goal.
Click to expand...

This is me really you give both or give neither.
Dale Johnson trying to justify both decisions is delving into realms of turning football into science not a sport.
If you’re going into such minute detail of each one then it’s total interference which we are told wasn’t going to happen. Being offside is a simple fact the case of is he interfering with play is very subjective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Bear
Brighton 2-2 Wolves: Verdict Thread
13 14 15
Replies
285
Views
8K
Carsy
C
Deutsch Wolf
Manchester City (H) 20/10: Build-Up & Match Thread
18 19 20
Replies
382
Views
10K
Dinowolf
Dinowolf
The Bear
Wolves 2-2 Crystal Palace: Verdict Thread
8 9 10
Replies
190
Views
5K
Tony Towner
Tony Towner
The Bear
Wolves 1-2 Newcastle: Verdict Thread
7 8 9
Replies
176
Views
6K
big mean bunny
big mean bunny
The Bear
Aston Villa 3-1 Wolves: Verdict Thread
8 9 10
Replies
194
Views
7K
Elephant Pyjamas
Elephant Pyjamas
Back
Top