Wolves 2-2 Crystal Palace: Verdict Thread

[The Saturday Boy]

Perhaps I wasn't watching the game carefully enough (stream), but why was Sarabia deemed to have a poor game? (Was hoping someone was going to put some player ratings up, but...)

Flattered to deceive…and did a lot of deceiving. He did a lot of good things, especially dropping into space to receive the ball but then didn’t do much with it. His two chances were not difficult, the first he didn’t even get a shot away, the second he made it too easy for the keeper.

 

[NicholasG1973]

It’s 100% a foul. In the ground seeing the replay i thought we had got away with one but having seen it since the officials got the decision bang on. Sa had control of the ball and Munoz runs into his elbow which makes him release it.

You’re definitely not seeing what I’m seeing.

 

[Tredman]

I’ve had a scoot around SM and other forums while waiting today, not seen a single post by anyone anywhere, apart from one weirdo on the Athletic, who doesn’t want him sacked.

 

[sycophantia]

You’re definitely not seeing what I’m seeing.

On motd, Joe Hart said according to the laws it was a foul, that's good enough for me.

 

[slink]

You’re definitely not seeing what I’m seeing.

As Sycopanthia says go and watch motd. Hart shows exactly why it’s a foul, it’s not a subjective thing either. Sa has his hands on the ball and Munoz collides with him. That means ball is under control and it’s a foul.

 

[NicholasG1973]

I saw MOTD and I saw what Joe Hart said.

I don’t agree with him, either.

 

[StuardoWulf]

I’m not convinced but hey ho, we’ll never know now.

I can assure you it would, there were loads of people (in the SB) including me baying for his blood, when it was getting into well supported chants "you're getting sacked in the morning" we scored and of course got behind the team, BTW I think the Palace fans joined in lol. At the substitutions "you don't know what you;re doing"
Unusually no Gary O'Niels barmy army chants, I think everybody is past tipping point.

There seems to be a narrative that the fans in the ground are apathetic , they ain't. Everybody is very fucking pissed off but do you expect them not to try to get behind the players in the hope of lifting them.

 

[slink]

I saw MOTD and I saw what Joe Hart said.

I don’t agree with him, either.

Which bit don’t you agree with?

 

[sycophantia]

I saw MOTD and I saw what Joe Hart said.

I don’t agree with him, either.

Basically you're disagreeing with the laws, which of course is fine, but the officials have to apply them as they are.

 

[Squeak]

My problem with Guedes last night was that he was moving into other areas and making the side unbalanced (silly comment really we are unbalanced everywhere!). Several occasions later on we’d switched the ball over to Semedo and there was no pass forward for him. When the pass is on he’s not the best at retaining possession anyway. If there is a role for Guedes we’ve yet to nail down of what that might be.
Not defending Sarabia by the way, two terrible misses (why didn’t he lob the onrushing keeper in the first?) and after the second he was appalling. He does look to come short and take the ball and that allowed some nice combinations with Semedo first half. Neither he or Guedes are the answer.

I noticed that but assumed it was an instruction from GON to find space / gaps to exploit so he had to play deeper than he normally would. Personally think Guedes did OK for his cameo role.

 

[Woburn Wolf]

It pains me to say but I think Guedes needs to start against Saints. Sarabia just isn't reliable enough and he clearly doesn't rate young Gomes or Forbs.
I'm now going into hiding so DW can't track me down.
I suppose Toti can play LB and push RAN further forward, although I think he's better coming from deep.

I agree re Guedes. He makes good runs and has shown he can finish.

 

[Alan]

I can assure you it would, there were loads of people (in the SB) including me baying for his blood, when it was getting into well supported chants "you're getting sacked in the morning" we scored and of course got behind the team, BTW I think the Palace fans joined in lol. At the substitutions "you don't know what you;re doing"
Unusually no Gary O'Niels barmy army chants, I think everybody is past tipping point.

There seems to be a narrative that the fans in the ground are apathetic , they ain't. Everybody is very fucking pissed off but do you expect them not to try to get behind the players in the hope of lifting them.

I meant I’m not convinced he’d have been sacked even if the we lost and the crowd did completely turn. The tension was definitely ready to snap in the stands, no denying it.

 

[Tony Towner]

Just watching back the disallowed goal, trust me if it’s the other way around we start to get all the tin hat stuff from our fan base.
It’s absolutely not being overturned if it’s given onfield.
Sa goes to dive on the ball doesn’t have it under control and the contact doesn’t impede him very fortunate.

In my world, I don't think it's a foul, in modern football it's getting given 99 times out of 100

 

[NicholasG1973]

Basically you're disagreeing with the laws, which of course is fine, but the officials have to apply them as they are.

Funnily enough, yes, I’ve found myself disagreeing quite frequently about the way footballing laws have been officiated in the last couple of seasons.

 

[The Bear]

Sa had two hands on the ball for a tiny fraction of a second whilst sliding on his stomach across the attacker. I don't consider that being in control of it, and I don't think it was a foul either as Sa initiated the contact IMO.

The laws of the game let him get away with it ultimately. At least we were on the beneficiary end of it for a change as a loss would have been unthinkable so late on again.

 

[NicholasG1973]

Sa had two hands on the ball for a tiny fraction of a second whilst sliding on his stomach across the attacker. I don't consider that being in control of it, and I don't think it was a foul either as Sa initiated the contact IMO.

The laws of the game let him get away with it ultimately. At least we were on the beneficiary end of it for a change as a loss would have been unthinkable so late on again.

Perfectly articulated.

If we score that and it’s disallowed, there’s World War III on here.

Got away with one for a change.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Perfectly articulated.

If we score that and it’s disallowed, there’s World War III on here.

Got away with one for a change.

We also got away with Chalobah missing what was basically an open goal from six yards out, then a second later managing to block a shot which was 100% flying in.

Add that to Brighton's inexplicable butchering of a 4 on 1 when they were winning with seconds to go last week.

We're actually very fortunate not to still be on 1 point.

 

[WVWolf]

I don't think it's fair to say we got away with one when by law it is 100% a foul.

 

[Tyrannosaurus Dan]

Palace could genuinely have had 5 or 6 goals. Their finishing was appalling.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Palace could genuinely have had 5 or 6 goals. Their finishing was appalling.

There really wasn't a great deal of difference between yesterday and the Chelsea game. Just Chelsea have Noni Madueke and Cole Palmer rather than Ismaila Sarr and Eddie Nketiah.

Oh and we're now playing an extra centre half to stop nothing, which also means that apparently we now can't use our £22m Brazil international in midfield.