****The Official Lapps Match Thread v Burnley (H/L) ****

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

4 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Exactly. People need to take a breath and get a little perspective. We’ve just lost to the league’s runaway leaders. We have a new manager who’s trying to turn things around after a difficult period. Plus we are struggling at home for some reason. It’s hardly a massive surprise that we didn’t compete. Let’s see where we are after the next six games before deciding to sack the whole back five and all the recruitment team.

Perspective? I look at what Burnley have done selling their assets and I compare that to the job Webber has done. It's not a one off lose is it....

Edited February 4, 2023 by Kenny Foggo

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

It was pointed out before the match by the pundits that our midfield could be in trouble. And they were right. I was hoping for a win but expecting a score draw. But they were so much better and Cullen had an armchair ride for them.

[unique 434]

Canary Call Ted giving away too much information………a white van is heading to Sheringham as I type……..

[Ulfotto 622]

To be fair the ref was consistent in terms of the cards. How in didn’t spot the ball went out after the Dowell chance is really poor. Plus the handball is a stonewall in my opinion. The penalty incident kinda of sums up our luck at the moment.

Kompany has leant from Pep in how he sets his team out and fair play they were good. The point though is rarely made that Pep teams and his those who copy his style are some of the most cynical and dirty teams you will ever see. Burnley today wasted no time kicking the ball away every chance they got and like Man City were kings of the tactical foul.
 

 

[Cowboy 197]

7 minutes ago, kick it off said:

Did you even read the original comment that said the ref was **** but its out own fault we lost today? There's so much pathetic inability to read perfectly coherent posts and take them totally out of context on here after a defeat. It's endemic, inaccurate and unhelpful.

Not just your post, old fruit, I was speaking in more general terms, but yes I see what you mean about what you, personally, said. Apologies if I have wronged you. But I don't think the ref was in any way awful today either - it's just a victim mentality here most of the time, so far as I can see.

[All the Germans 1,075]

Just now, Ulfotto said:

Plus the handball is a stonewall in my opinion. The penalty incident kinda of sums up our luck at the moment.

 

It was never, ever a penalty. The ball hit his leg, bounced up and hit his arm. What was he supposed to do with his arm?

Now, if the argument is that it would have probably have been given to Man City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Man Utd, Liverpool etc, that inconsistency in the 'decision' making is something I completely agree with.

[unique 434]

Why would any NCFC fan desire promotion via the playoffs this season after watching this tepid performance against Burnley, who themselves will be regarded as one of the ‘whipping boys’ in the PL next season?

[Midlands Yellow 3,929]

7 minutes ago, unique said:

Canary Call Ted giving away too much information………a white van is heading to Sheringham as I type……..

More on Ted please, what did he say? 

[Ulfotto 622]

3 minutes ago, All the Germans said:

It was never, ever a penalty. The ball hit his leg, bounced up and hit his arm. What was he supposed to do with his arm?

Now, if the argument is that it would have probably have been given to Man City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Man Utd, Liverpool etc, that inconsistency in the 'decision' making is something I completely agree with.

To be I would say it skimmed his leg and then hit his hand which was clearly in an unnatural position. To be fair I have no idea what the rule is these days but I doubt there would have been many complaints had it been given.

 

[Indy 3,283]

That wasn’t good, far too slow, far too negative and far too predictable. Burnley pressed quick, played high compressed lines and passed forwards quickly. Everything we should have done.

Krull has been great for us but Gunny is our number 1, McLean isn’t good enough to play a deep lying passing role, after two decent games he’s very much back to the McLean we all know, it was very much a Smith like performance and unexpected to be honest!

Still Rome wasn’t build in a day.

[All the Germans 1,075]

2 minutes ago, Ulfotto said:

To be I would say it skimmed his leg and then hit his hand which was clearly in an unnatural position. To be fair I have no idea what the rule is these days but I doubt there would have been many complaints had it been given.

 

I also don't know what the rule is now, so cannot say it wasn't a penalty under whatever the hell the rules currently are. However, it should never be a penalty. He made no attempt to handle the ball, it did skim is leg but enough to deflect it onto his hand, which had no intent on handling it.

I like the old rule of "intent to handle" being the deciding factor, not trying to decide what's natural and what isn't.

[SwindonCanary 455]

Admite  it we were out classed, if we go up it will happen loads of times 

[unique 434]

14 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

More on Ted please, what did he say? 

Overflowing with optimism…..

Next season we will be scoring 100 goals and securing 100 points…was willing to take bets from all-comers….

[Barham Blitz 652]

It wasn't as bad as the scoreline suggests.  I'm pretty confident we will make the playoffs.  But we will be annihilated in the premiership with this squad.  Promotion if it happens this time around -  would literally be to take the money and rebuild after that.

[Midlands Yellow 3,929]

1 minute ago, unique said:

Overflowing with optimism…..

Next season we will be scoring 100 goals and securing 100 points…was willing to take bets from all-comers….

Best that white van arrives very soon. 

[Canarywary 104]

2 hours ago, Ulfotto said:

Anyone know what Don Goodman beef with us is. He is down on us every game he does.

I agree, I swear he hates us. It makes watching a bad performance even more infuriating when his punditry is so one-sided.

[canarybubbles 1,915]

We were outclassed, but who knows what might have happened if we had not gifted them a goal after eight minutes. If we had managed to survive their early onslaught, we would probably have grown in confidence and started to play a bit. As it was, a team and a set of supporters both low in confidence never seemed to believe it was possible after yet another Krul howler.

I know I'm snatching at straws here, but I'm not giving up on the play-offs just yet.

[Ulfotto 622]

4 minutes ago, Canarywary said:

I agree, I swear he hates us. It makes watching a bad performance even more infuriating when his punditry is so one-sided.

I know right. Its every time I can only guess he doesn’t like travelling to Norfolk.

Edited February 4, 2023 by Ulfotto

[dylanisabaddog 4,867]

27 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

We were outclassed, but who knows what might have happened if we had not gifted them a goal after eight minutes. If we had managed to survive their early onslaught, we would probably have grown in confidence and started to play a bit. As it was, a team and a set of supporters both low in confidence never seemed to believe it was possible after yet another Krul howler.

I know I'm snatching at straws here, but I'm not giving up on the play-offs just yet.

Couldn't agree more. First goal wins 70% of games. We gave them one then missed a sitter. It's a game of very fine margins and they are a very good Championship team. Sadly they will go up and come straight back down again. 

[canarybubbles 1,915]

1 minute ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Couldn't agree more. First goal wins 70% of games. We gave them one then missed a sitter. It's a game of very fine margins and they are a very good Championship team. Sadly they will go up and come straight back down again. 

I don't agree with your last sentence. I think they will stay up. In a way I was a little disappointed with them, actually. They were not the flowing team I had imagined from what I'd read about them - they were a sort of Watford-type team who had the right mix of just about enough skill plus intelligent fouling to keep them afloat in the PL. I know I'm biased but I didn't think they were as good as either of our promotion sides as a Championship team. Or at least certainly not as exciting, although probably much more street-wise. 

[ged in the onion bag 854]

One day, Vincent Kompany will become our manager, and the Pinkun will be full of ‘remember the day his Burnley side came here and showed us how to play football’!

sound familiar?

[NFN FC 1,122]

Threw the game in the first 10 mins and allowed Burnley to take control of the game. Sloppy passing giving them the ball back at every opportunity. 

A load of squit

[chicken 2,604]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

The fact is that we lost Buendia and Godfrey over the space of about 12 months and then blew the proceeds.

When they cashed in on their valuable assets they successful managed to reinvest and rebuild their team into their new managers style.

Self-financing fails when your recruitment is sh*t. That's the crux of the matter, our recruitment has been sh*t. Now we've got nobody left to flog to finance a rebuild and even if we did we'd blow it on useless Greeks or we'd spent £8m on a Brazilian who just got played off the park by the £1m Brazilian that Burnley bought in the same window.

Debatable. 

They sold Woods and got relegated.

What they did though, was sell the majority of the assets they had left in one go to initiate a rebuild.

Where as, like you say, we sold ours off in bits in an attempt to keep hold of key assets. And it worked. In reality, if we had done the same, we would have sold Lewis, Godfrey, Aarons and Buendia in one go and invested it all back into the squad in one summer. As that is pretty much what Burnley have done.

And at the moment it looks good because they are not in the premier league. We tried to do what they did by selling Buendia, but in the premier league. Which is much more difficult as you are expecting players new to this country to immediately bed in. Far easier to do that in the championship.

Lets also not forget that they have many seasons of premier league success behind them whilst also spending fairly little money. They can arguably afford better wages because they are also post a take-over.

As much as people like to deride Webber, I don't personally believe it is all down to him. It is very easy to point at players successes and failures after they have arrived, but we have to remember they were signed for their prior form, not their form after they come to us. Nothing is a dead rubber. Naismith looked good when he scored against Chelsea before coming to us, he even looked good Vs Liverpool. Turned out a poor signing.

We may well still need to improve the scouts we have. Only time will tell. What we do need is to be able to offer better money if we are to sign better players. I think that much is clear really. 

[ged in the onion bag 854]

1 hour ago, kick it off said:

It absolutely was a pen, and the inconsistency with bookings was absurd. He missed a corner that went 4 yards off the pitch ffs. But like I ALREADY said, he was **** but we were architects of our own downfall.

Neither by way of the actual rules or the integrity of fairness is that a penalty.   To think it. so is plain desperation and a lack of understanding of the rules.   
 

There’s more to it than a ball hitting an arm!   That given to Burnley and this forum would be in uproar!   
 

The rule is a joke anyway but they got that right!   

Edited February 4, 2023 by ged in the onion bag

[canarybubbles 1,915]

4 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Neither by way of the actual rules or the integrity of fairness is that a penalty.   To think it. so is plain desperation and a lack of understanding of the rules.   
 

There’s more to it than a ball hitting an arm!   That given to Burnley and this forum would be in uproar!   
 

The rule is a joke anyway but they got that right!   

I think we have to accept that handball penalty decisions are either going to have an unavoidable subjective element (such as "intention" or "un-natural position") or ANY handball is automatically a penalty however unlucky it is.

[Budapest Canary 152]

According to the current rules and practice it was a clear penalty.  The rules no longer consider whether "the hand was actively seeking the ball" , i.e. clear intention, but rather that the player is actively seeking to avoid contact or not. This is often explained by the "hand in natural position" formula, which is slightly misleading because keeping arms behind one's back is anything but, and when one jumps or falls over it is quite natural to wave hands around, but the criteria are that the defending team gains advantage by touching the ball with hand and the player does not actively try to avoid contact. Since both conditions stood here, I think with VAR it would have been a clear penalty.     

[ged in the onion bag 854]

1 hour ago, canarybubbles said:

I think we have to accept that handball penalty decisions are either going to have an unavoidable subjective element (such as "intention" or "un-natural position") or ANY handball is automatically a penalty however unlucky it is.

Or we go back to how it worked for a 100 yrs, it has to be intentional.    But that today was neither intentional or unnatural!   He simply couldn’t react at that distance regardless of the fact it also hit his leg first!

The rule anyway completely destroys the integrity of the game.  It also has to be fair!   If we give penalties for instances where players can not do anything to avoid the ball striking there hands then of course it will favour the attacking teams (often those with the most money - and the top teams as was argued) over a team who has to defend   There should be no unnatural positions if the ball is struck from within 3metres regardless but arms are naturally on the end of torso’s.    We don’t have to accept crap rules, we are football fans, we could protest it!

[ged in the onion bag 854]

38 minutes ago, Budapest Canary said:

According to the current rules and practice it was a clear penalty.  The rules no longer consider whether "the hand was actively seeking the ball" , i.e. clear intention, but rather that the player is actively seeking to avoid contact or not. This is often explained by the "hand in natural position" formula, which is slightly misleading because keeping arms behind one's back is anything but, and when one jumps or falls over it is quite natural to wave hands around, but the criteria are that the defending team gains advantage by touching the ball with hand and the player does not actively try to avoid contact. Since both conditions stood here, I think with VAR it would have been a clear penalty.     

I don’t!   Sure, it might have been given or the ref would have been sent to the screen, and either way one of them would have demonstrated they’d never played the game before and given us a chance to blaze it over the bar!     Anyway, changing the subject, how good were McLean, Sara, Sargent and Dowell.   Dear oh dear!   

[Nuff Said 5,088]

I’m not clear @ged in the onion bag. Are you saying it wasn’t a penalty by the current rules, or that it was, but it shouldn’t be? Two quite different things.

[Capt. Pants 4,195]

Well the bubble has well and truly burst, that was fcuking awful. Yes a a few nice passes 2nd half but their keeper doesn't have a shot to save.

Curious lineup with McLean playing as sweeper/3rd centre half. To be fair he was our best player 2nd half but that was a nothing performance.