MOTD

[lake district canary 4,531]

9 hours ago, ron obvious said:

They gave a whole new meaning to the word 'begrudging'. Apparently we might cause one or two teams a few problems.

I predict this is going to be one of the funniest seasons ever, watching pundits trying to twist, turn & squirm their way out of their pre-season snobbish rubbishing of our squad.

^^^ This.  The lack of praise for our performance and the way we play was stark in it's absence. I guess if we can scare the heck out of Chelsea and pull off a win next Saturday, we might start to get a bit more detailed analysis.

[Surfer 1,547]

I thought the Newcastle analysis was good, our time was spent interviewing Pukki and rightly so, however I agree with the overall sentiment. 

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

Let's get all this justified venom against that narrow-minded,  overpaid crew on MotD, and elsewhere, out of our systems straight away.

It has all been so predictable from both sides.

The fact is that NCFC will have to achieve a  lot more than most, if not all, Premier League teams this season to gain any appreciable recognition but we cannot possibly continue to spend column inches moaning about it.

Let's just quietly get on with the job knowing that genuine supporters the length of the land (except in deepest, sour grape growing  Suffolk,) appreciate quality when they see it and will be less biased in their opinions.

Actions speak louder than words.

[PurpleCanary 5,558]

16 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Let's get all this justified venom against that narrow-minded,  overpaid crew on MotD, and elsewhere, out of our systems straight away.

It has all been so predictable from both sides.

The fact is that NCFC will have to achieve a  lot more than most, if not all, Premier League teams this season to gain any appreciable recognition but we cannot possibly continue to spend column inches moaning about it.

Let's just quietly get on with the job knowing that genuine supporters the length of the land (except in deepest, sour grape growing  Suffolk,) appreciate quality when they see it and will be less biased in their opinions.

Actions speak louder than words.

Yes. There will be quite enough during the season to get excited/downcast/joyful/suicidal about without obsessing over here-today-gone-tomorrow punditry.

[Fuzzar 1,702]

Having just watched it, I don't have a problem with the coverage. Murphy was complimentary about us and Shearer picked holes in the Toon performance. 

I'm sure if we carry on in this vein as the season progresses, we'll rightly get the plaudits we deserve. 

[Herman 9,760]

I don't know what version some of you watched but I thought it was fair and balanced. City got praise. United got a bit of a bashing.

 

What Fuzzar just said.😀👍

Edited August 18, 2019 by Herman

[ron obvious 1,502]

Sorry, it was not fair & balanced. If Villa or Sheff U had played like that or got a result like that they'd have been wetting themselves. Our play was simply breathtaking, absolutely top drawer football on a level with the best in the world. No mention of how we continually switched play, sliced them open, put slide rule passes between opposition players with the same precision a champion snooker player evades reds when potting the black at the other end of the table.

The emphasis (& time spent) was on how bad Newcastle were, but that's because we made them so as much as anything.

Teams will find us out. We have a tendency to over elaborate unnecessarily (Todd, who is rapidly becoming a top class player) demonstrated this when he skillfully received the ball (from Lewis I think) & turned straight back into trouble. It's the sort of thing all our players are guilty of occasionally, & we will have to choose our 'clever' moments a little more judiciously.

Farke will make sure this happens. Gonna be a hell of a season.

 

[Aggy 755]

Yep, agreed with Fuzzar and Herman. Murphy spoke about us, Shearer about Newcastle. 

MOTD is predominantly a highlights show with a bit of commentary/analysis. There are too many games for detailed analysis of everything that every team does well.

[Aggy 755]

1 minute ago, ron obvious said:

Sorry, it was not fair & balanced. If Villa or Sheff U had played like that or got a result like that they'd have been wetting themselves. Our play was simply breathtaking, absolutely top drawer football on a level with the best in the world. No mention of how we continually switched play, sliced them open, put slide rule passes between opposition players with the same precision a champion snooker player evades reds when potting the black at the other end of the table.

The emphasis (& time spent) was on how bad Newcastle were, but that's because we made them so as much as anything.

Teams will find us out. We have a tendency to over elaborate unnecessarily (Todd, who is rapidly becoming a top class player) demonstrated this when he skillfully received the ball (from Lewis I think) & turned straight back into trouble. It's the sort of thing all our players are guilty of occasionally, & we will have to choose our 'clever' moments a little more judiciously.

Farke will make sure this happens. Gonna be a hell of a season.

 

Was it on a level with the best in the world? We scored three against an average Newcastle side who themselves had two or three really easy chances they missed x the game could easily have been a 3-3 draw. Let’s not get carried away - we were nowhere near a Man City or Liverpool standard.

[ron obvious 1,502]

Just now, Aggy said:

Was it on a level with the best in the world? We scored three against an average Newcastle side who themselves had two or three really easy chances they missed x the game could easily have been a 3-3 draw. Let’s not get carried away - we were nowhere near a Man City or Liverpool standard.

 

In footballing terms, yes. We aren't as strong or athletic as teams like those you mention, &, much as I like him, Hanley isn't quite good enough. You can never be sure, but I think we'll be much more secure at the back when Christoph returns.

To say it "could easily have been a 3-3 draw" is, frankly, rubbish. It could easily have been 6-2, or 7-0 or anything in between. We were never in any danger.

I appreciate the danger of wearing yellow & green goggles, but some of the commenters here seem to be wearing some with a dismal grey tint. We are glorious!

 

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

It was all too predictable. And to be fair it is early days. But I think football has to be taken just like the old cliche, one game at a time.

So after the creditable performance if not result against the European Champions, for 45 minutes, we totally outplayed Newcastle with some sublime touches, great movement and accurate passing along with a pressing game that saw us get the ball back so many times in their half of the pitch. And Shelvey never got out of his half.

These type of things can't be shown on a highlights programme when there are seven matches to fit in. So we were left with the goals basically. And our hat trick man. Fair enough. But they have seen these type of matches time and time again so it isn't sommething they will drool over.

The problem lies with football TV producers thinking you have to have top footballers as pundits. You do need personality as well and you couldn't get too many more boring, monotonic pundits than Shearer and Murphy I think Murphy was impressed but his dispassionate summing up of us just didn't tell the viewers what our game had been like.

If they thought we were so bad last week, they could have remarked how good we were this week.

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

Let's get all this justified venom against that narrow-minded,  overpaid crew on MotD, and elsewhere, out of our systems straight away.

It has all been so predictable from both sides.

The fact is that NCFC will have to achieve a  lot more than most, if not all, Premier League teams this season to gain any appreciable recognition but we cannot possibly continue to spend column inches moaning about it.

Let's just quietly get on with the job knowing that genuine supporters the length of the land (except in deepest, sour grape growing  Suffolk,) appreciate quality when they see it and will be less biased in their opinions.

Actions speak louder than words.

More sense  from  you Broado. We ignore the noise, tackle difficult topics and put right the sins of the past. All without losing sight of the fact we must stay at peak performance at all times to survive in this  competitive  league. 

[Aggy 755]

23 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

 

In footballing terms, yes. We aren't as strong or athletic as teams like those you mention, &, much as I like him, Hanley isn't quite good enough. You can never be sure, but I think we'll be much more secure at the back when Christoph returns.

To say it "could easily have been a 3-3 draw" is, frankly, rubbish. It could easily have been 6-2, or 7-0 or anything in between. We were never in any danger.

I appreciate the danger of wearing yellow & green goggles, but some of the commenters here seem to be wearing some with a dismal grey tint. We are glorious!

 

 

The Newcastle header wide in the first half was absolutely easy - a virtually open net from 6 yards at 0-0. A better side than Newcastle (of which I think there will be at least seventeen this season) score that - that goes in and we’re on the back foot with doubts creeping in. It could easily have gone a different way. Until we went ahead they had as good if not better chances than us. I’m not sure we had many more “clear” chances than they did - neither of Pukki’s first two were clear chances (just great finishes).  I can’t see where we had seven clear good chances to score, and the best chance of the game was that Newcastle missed header.

To throw something else into the mix, Southampton lost 2-1 to Liverpool. We were 4-0 down within half an hour.

We are good and we shouldn’t downplay ourselves. But the comments on here, even when we got stuffed by Liverpool, were as if the pundits should have been suggesting we were the best side in the country. We aren’t. We will hopefully prove to be a decent mid table premier league side with potential to build on that in the future. 

I don’t think there are many ‘grey tinted glasses’ on here at all - we play good football going forward and I don’t think that is disputed by anyone. But we also look shaky at the back and shouldn’t get carried away until we’re mathematically safe!

[WD40 720]

11 hours ago, Aggy said:

The handball one in the Man City game I think VAR got right. The new handball rule is ludicrous and I’m not sure we would have thought Spurs were hard done by if that had stood. As you say though, that’s not a VAR issue but an issue with the new rule.

The one I do have a slight issue with is the offsides when it’s using a shoulder rather than arm and the margin is tiny. There was one game last week (I think it may have been Man City with one that Sterling had disallowed) where VAR had drawn the line down from attacker and defender - but because of the angle of his body the attacker’s arm was the furthest part forward. As you can’t score with the arm, they had drawn the line from the attacker’s arm pit. The gap between defender and attacker’s armpit was tiny - mms rather than cms. So should there be a bit of leeway for error? How do you decide where the arm pit starts and the arm ends when you’re looking at a still frame picture where the player is leaning/twisting? 

The cricket Hawkeye for lbw requires more than half of the ball to be hitting half of the stumps because it isn’t 100 per cent accurate all of the time - when the calls are so tight for the offsides, I’d like to still see it go in the attacker’s favour rather than assume the VAR line is infallible.

It’s still offside if it’s millimetres, and hawk eye is predictive rather than a replay of what actually happened. That’s why there’s margin of error. Happy for the rule to allow some leeway if there is ambiguity in the image, or a better definition of where handball starts. But as far as I’m aware a player is offside if any part of their body that can score a goal is in front of the 2nd last man when the ball is played. 

[Aggy 755]

Good point about Hawkeye being predictive.

I presume when measuring against a defender, they don’t take the defender’s arm into account (as he can’t “defend” with that in the same way the attacker can’t score with his arm)? 

[WD40 720]

1 minute ago, Aggy said:

Good point about Hawkeye being predictive.

I presume when measuring against a defender, they don’t take the defender’s arm into account (as he can’t “defend” with that in the same way the attacker can’t score with his arm)? 

You’ve got me there! If that was the case that would make VAR decisions even harder!

[king canary 7,605]

27 minutes ago, Aggy said:

The Newcastle header wide in the first half was absolutely easy - a virtually open net from 6 yards at 0-0. A better side than Newcastle (of which I think there will be at least seventeen this season) score that - that goes in and we’re on the back foot with doubts creeping in. It could easily have gone a different way. Until we went ahead they had as good if not better chances than us. I’m not sure we had many more “clear” chances than they did - neither of Pukki’s first two were clear chances (just great finishes).  I can’t see where we had seven clear good chances to score, and the best chance of the game was that Newcastle missed header.

To throw something else into the mix, Southampton lost 2-1 to Liverpool. We were 4-0 down within half an hour.

We are good and we shouldn’t downplay ourselves. But the comments on here, even when we got stuffed by Liverpool, were as if the pundits should have been suggesting we were the best side in the country. We aren’t. We will hopefully prove to be a decent mid table premier league side with potential to build on that in the future. 

I don’t think there are many ‘grey tinted glasses’ on here at all - we play good football going forward and I don’t think that is disputed by anyone. But we also look shaky at the back and shouldn’t get carried away until we’re mathematically safe!

Xg suggests we created the better chances- I understand what you're saying about if that header goes in it's a different game but equally Pukki and Cantwell both had decent chances to score before that.

[Aggy 755]

10 minutes ago, king canary said:

Xg suggests we created the better chances- I understand what you're saying about if that header goes in it's a different game but equally Pukki and Cantwell both had decent chances to score before that.

I’m not suggesting we weren’t the better side - we were and overall we did have the better chances.

My point was rather against the suggestion that we were on a level with the best in the world. Man City, Liverpool go to far better sides than Newcastle and their opposition won’t get chances as good as those that Newcastle had yesterday, and they’d create more “clear” chances against those better opponents than we did against Newcastle.

[WD40 720]

38 minutes ago, Aggy said:

The Newcastle header wide in the first half was absolutely easy - a virtually open net from 6 yards at 0-0. A better side than Newcastle (of which I think there will be at least seventeen this season) score that - that goes in and we’re on the back foot with doubts creeping in. It could easily have gone a different way. Until we went ahead they had as good if not better chances than us. I’m not sure we had many more “clear” chances than they did - neither of Pukki’s first two were clear chances (just great finishes).  I can’t see where we had seven clear good chances to score, and the best chance of the game was that Newcastle missed header.

To throw something else into the mix, Southampton lost 2-1 to Liverpool. We were 4-0 down within half an hour.

We are good and we shouldn’t downplay ourselves. But the comments on here, even when we got stuffed by Liverpool, were as if the pundits should have been suggesting we were the best side in the country. We aren’t. We will hopefully prove to be a decent mid table premier league side with potential to build on that in the future. 

I don’t think there are many ‘grey tinted glasses’ on here at all - we play good football going forward and I don’t think that is disputed by anyone. But we also look shaky at the back and shouldn’t get carried away until we’re mathematically safe!

Remember Liverpool flew to Istanbul and back and played an extra time game midweek...that was a much better time to be playing them. The transit of property broadly exists in football but there is always an individual circumstance in games that affects results. I don’t fear Southampton. They look very poor at the back and only scored from GK gift. 

[Aggy 755]

1 minute ago, WD40 said:

Remember Liverpool flew to Istanbul and back and played an extra time game midweek...that was a much better time to be playing them. The transit of property broadly exists in football but there is always an individual circumstance in games that affects results. I don’t fear Southampton. They look very poor at the back and only scored from GK gift. 

I’ll be surprised if both Newcastle and Southampton aren’t in the bottom three at the end of the season. Both look very poor. 

[All the Germans 1,075]

2 hours ago, Fuzzar said:

Having just watched it, I don't have a problem with the coverage. Murphy was complimentary about us and Shearer picked holes in the Toon performance. 

I'm sure if we carry on in this vein as the season progresses, we'll rightly get the plaudits we deserve. 

This. Why do we have some sort of victim complex. "The world hates us", "The media downplay us", "if it was x, y, z they'd say this...". 

The analysis was fine. They said that we deserved the win, Pukki played well and that Newcastle were terrible, particularly in attack. All true. You don't get in-depth analysis for any game from Match of the Day; the production team are just pleased if the viewers can understand 50% of what Shearer says.

 

[king canary 7,605]

23 minutes ago, All the Germans said:

This. Why do we have some sort of victim complex. "The world hates us", "The media downplay us", "if it was x, y, z they'd say this...". 

The analysis was fine. They said that we deserved the win, Pukki played well and that Newcastle were terrible, particularly in attack. All true. You don't get in-depth analysis for any game from Match of the Day; the production team are just pleased if the viewers can understand 50% of what Shearer says.

 

I thought it was a tad lazy- no real analysis of how we play, just replaying the goals and saying Pukki took them well and that he was cheap. Would have liked to see a bit more depth.

[hogesar 9,669]

Nothing wrong with what they said it was just lazy and didnt actually talk about any of our play, style etc.. which is fine, they don't have to.

You have to laugh a bit at the bare minimal discussion on Pukkis fantastic hattrick. A compliment from Danny but generally glossed over. If a top 6 team has a striker score a hattrick like that they get their own 10 minute segment.

But let's not pretend MOTD ever offers really good analysis. You just notice it more when it's your own team!

[Indy 3,299]

To be honest those who count like Klopp gave us a great deal of respect after that game, he’s said we’re a good team and will do well, that’ll do for me, best or draw with  Chelsea and see if Lambert has any compliments! Can’t be arsed to watch MOTD after last week.