|
|
Post by Hatboy on Dec 26, 2014 17:32:46 GMT
Attendances in the league were pretty poor today we had the best by far Wealdstone 802 was the next best, Boringwood had their usual low crowd 278
|
|
|
|
Post by EFMTFTV on Dec 26, 2014 17:34:53 GMT
Don't tell Wealdstone we had a better crowd, it'll freak them out
|
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Dec 26, 2014 18:56:14 GMT
I forgot they're a big club, Jimmy Gray tweet:
JIMMYgray04 Result aside we had a great turnout again from supporters @stalbanscityfc keep it up, we need you as much as you need us, here's to top 2015
|
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Dec 26, 2014 21:22:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by asaintreborn on Dec 26, 2014 22:19:44 GMT
Wow I find it staggering how anyone would think that a draw was a fair result. The only thing that was clear is that someone should have called 999 after they scored, because St. Albans got mugged!! People will talk about Hemel having more possession second half and this was only because St.Albans managers had a clear game plan for the second half, which was to only press once they crossed the halfway line and kill them on the counter attack. Which was for me the wrong message to send to the players after our midfield dominated them in the 1st half. Although I can see why they made that decision as every time we broke with intent in the first half/second their defence looked like it needed a diaper change, I knew it was the wrong decision as we are not really a 1-0 winning team. Our defence always gives the opposition one chance a game and in this case it really was as Hemel scored with their only shot on target. The Irony of this was Locke, Gayle and Green pretty much won every single ariel battle all day. The one time they didn't it causes havoc with it eventually falling to Parkes on the edge of the area, who was having an anonymous game for his standards, but like the class player he is pops up at exactly the right moment. I have no idea why teams don't close him down when he is in that position, because he will at the very minimum test the keeper. Credit where Credit due to Hemel as they miraculously kept themselves in the game to deliver the vital sucker punch with some grit, determination and last ditch defending.
First half we should have really been at minimum 2-0 up and quite possibly 3 or 4-0 if we were lucky, with one of our players unable to adjust his feet when it fell to him after some ricochet from a Chappell long throw and us hitting the post too from another Chappell throw. Also we failed to pull the trigger on the edge of the box in both half's with Jordan Parkes proving what happens when you do. Coms brilliant again also showed his frustrating side, when he had several opportunities to shoot across the 90. The one time he did pull the trigger he chose the hardest of the lot when he chested it on the edge of the area and hit it on the half volley. Frendo should have had a second before half time, I was expecting Frendo to slot it past Walker like with the first goal. Instead he decides to round the keeper and allow the defender back into the game to make the tackle. Hemel might well have been lucky to start the second half with 11 men on the pitch. Chappell burst through on goal, but the ref signaled he got the ball despite asking the lino what he thought, which to me suggests he guessed. It would be interesting to see if anyone else had a better view because from my angle it looked a straight red, but I am happy to be proven wrong.
Second half chances were few and far between but this was due to over complicating our play or a lack of a quality final pass as we did get ourselves into some decent positions at times. Bad decision to give Lancaster of side at the end with a potential one on one as he was no where near offside.
Special Mentions to Sam Corcaran and Nathan Green who were my joint MOM with some truly fantastic performance. I swear their midfield was better last season probably because they were stockier and more physical. When teams play football against us we tend to fair better.
|
|
|
|
Post by asaintreborn on Dec 26, 2014 22:29:16 GMT
I don't get why the singing fans move to the side of the pitch when it's segregated as they split between two places behind the goal and underneath the cola stand with the non singing old men  In the second half when they were all together behind the goal they were so much louder. The only reason I stand on the side is for the view of the game. On the away games as the view are usually terrible from the side I will get involved. |
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Dec 26, 2014 23:16:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by COYS on Dec 26, 2014 23:26:33 GMT
Interesting that some have seen at as a fair result and others as the Saints being robbed. For me it was somewhere in between.
First time I've been able to get to Clarence Park in a while and I was impressed by the way we played in the first half and we more than deserved to be a goal up at half-time.
The second half was scrappier and, as someone as already said, this doesn't suit us at all. For one reason or another - it may have been a change in emphasis but I simply thought we looked a little leggy - we weren't going forward with the same intent after the break and missed a couple of decent chances to kill the game off which gave Hemel a way back into the game when they weren't playing particularly well.
It's a shame because although a point isn't a bad result there were three for the taking there and the Parkes goal was a fine strike but utterly preventable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Dec 27, 2014 0:46:03 GMT
For me, our first half performance was probably the best half of football we have played all season at home and, in truth, with all the chances and half chances we created, we really should have had Hemel dead and buried by the break. The second half, however, was totally different and Hemel were camped in our half for long periods. To try and defend one goal lead for 45 minutes plus is a very dangerous game plan in my book. The 3 or 4 occasions that we did counter attack, however, we put them under severe pressure and one of those occasions, just before the Hemel equaliser, when Comley and Lancaster seemed to get in each others way, we really should have put the game to bed. I have got to say, though, that the equaliser from Jordan Parkes was sublime and it is not the first time he has done it this season. He is the one player in their side that it is imperative you keep a tight rein on and give no space whatsoever or he will kill you. Overall, a really good team performance today and Gayle and Beckles get better and better every game and also, a much improved showing from Corcoran. My MOM, though, has to go to James Comley, who had an absolutely outstanding game.
Onwards and upwards to Sutton. COYS!
|
|
|
|
Post by notsorecentconvert on Dec 27, 2014 10:03:35 GMT
I wouldn't say we were mugged but we just about deserved to hold on, based on the 90 minutes as a whole, and it took a bolt from the blue to deny us.
One frustration that is a general feature of games at this level, but which dominated yesterday, is the frequency with which the assistant referees wave their flags for offside.
The default seems to be: if in doubt flag for offside. The officials yesterday were particularly bad.
Officials (and some supporters) need to understand the fundamental point that the player is only offside if he is in an offside position at the moment the ball is played.
So many times a pass was made from our own half and by the time it reached the forward he was beyond the last defender and so the linesman stuck his flag up thinking "well it must be offside".
I'm not saying Frendo and co are world class and time their runs to perfection every time but there were several occasions yesterday when they were onside when the ball was played but were flagged offside as the ball arrived at them, seconds after it was struck. This is a really irritating misinterpretation of the rule, based on a presumption that it's better to flag for offside than have players break away to score and then face protests from the defending team.
Like in pro football the trend is for the defenders to stop and put added pressure on the officials to give a decision.
|
|
|
|
Post by ad43footsoldier on Dec 27, 2014 11:06:52 GMT
Hemel's football consisted a lot of passing the ball around without much conviction or cutting edge and then Jordan Parkes scores. I can't imagine them picking up too many points without him.
Well done to the 17 year olds with the drum and the 10 adults who joined in after they scored in the 89th minute. Rest assured our fans will be much louder next week.
|
|
oldgeezer
Saints Youth Team Player
Posts: 248 
|
Post by oldgeezer on Dec 27, 2014 12:12:10 GMT
Have to agree with recentconvert - the offsides were often not offside at all. Really annoying. And yesterday they were particularly bad.
But a very enjoyable boxing day game - despite being mugged at the last minute.
|
|
|
|
Post by EFMTFTV on Dec 27, 2014 13:53:31 GMT
It's particularly annoying when the player has run past the defender after the ball has been played and then they still get flagged for offside
|
|
|
|
Post by COYS on Dec 27, 2014 14:46:41 GMT
Fairly certain Lancaster was flagged offside for a run he made from inside his own half at one point as well. Dreadful officials at this level are nothing new, sadly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Dec 27, 2014 15:10:14 GMT
Yes, that was with about ten minutes left I think. He was inside by quite a way.
But oh well, I don't think officiating will ever improve at this level.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Dec 27, 2014 16:11:39 GMT
|
|
yellowalf
Saints Reserve Team Player
Posts: 301
|
Post by yellowalf on Dec 28, 2014 9:20:19 GMT
Officials (and some supporters) need to understand the fundamental point that the player is only offside if he is in an offside position at the moment the ball is played. So many times a pass was made from our own half and by the time it reached the forward he was beyond the last defender and so the linesman stuck his flag up thinking "well it must be offside". Like in pro football the trend is for the defenders to stop and put added pressure on the officials to give a decision. I would add that officials (and some supporters) need to understand that it is not an offence in itself to be in an offside position. For it to be an offence, the offside player has to either touch the ball, prevent an opponent from playing the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball, or gain an advantage by being in that position ie if the ball rebounds from the post/bar or deflects rebounds from an opponent. A lot of TV pundits seem to have missed the law change in 2013 that meant any ball deflecting off an opponent does not put a player onside. It has to be clearly kicked to him for the player to be onside yet almost weekly I hear some TV expert saying that the ball came off a defender last so the ref "got it wrong". It's also worth remembering that the linesman flags for the position and it is the ref who should decide whether the player is committing the offence. There will always be situations in a game where the ref doesn't have a clear view and will have to take the lino's word yet in my opinion there are too many weak refs at non-league level who let the lino carry the can for all offside decisions. The main problem for me is that to see the ball being kicked and simultaneously look across the line is virtually impossible for a human eye. There is an element of guesswork is involved but as the game has quickened over the years, the accuracy of that guesswork is weakening. I'd like to see the rule changed to make it more difficult to get the decision wrong: either remove offside altogether or make it only an offence if a player is stationary or moving towards their own half, ie any run forward to beat the offside trap cannot be offside. Until FIFA/UEFA/FA are going to allow a fifth official with video replay to get involved we are always going to get offside decisions given incorrectly. And, of course, video replay isn't going to help any team in Conference South and below! As it happens, I thought that decision against Lancaster was criminal as the lino was so far behind play he didn't have a clue where Lancaster was when the ball was played and just guessed. |
|
yellowalf
Saints Reserve Team Player
Posts: 301
|
Post by yellowalf on Dec 28, 2014 9:28:58 GMT
Hemel might well have been lucky to start the second half with 11 men on the pitch. Chappell burst through on goal, but the ref signaled he got the ball despite asking the lino what he thought, which to me suggests he guessed. It would be interesting to see if anyone else had a better view because from my angle it looked a straight red, but I am happy to be proven wrong. At the time I thought it was a clear dive and a yellow for Chappell. Looking at the video I can't say for certain that the ball is touched by the defender although it does look as it if was. What is very clear, and confirms what I thought at the time, is that Chappell falls to the ground with both legs together as if they were tied at the ankles. That is not how the body falls if it is tripped up. There may well have been marginal contact but nowhere near enough contact to take Chappell off-balance and he tried for the foul rather than going on for goal. If he's going to get knocked to the ground by a feather then what is he doing on a football pitch? A similar situation happened for Stoke's penalty at Everton when Bojan was challenged and just kept his right foot in the air to facilitate a fall. It was a clear dive (although contact with Bojan's left foot may have caused a penalty a split-second later) and to hear Phil Neville condone it as trying to get a penalty for your team was nothing short of disgraceful. Yet again, while TV experts try to claim that it is acceptable to cheat to get a penalty we will never rid the game of divers. Chapell went for the foul, presumably hoping for the red card for the defender, rather than carrying on and trying for a second goal. |
|
|
|
Post by davymac55 on Dec 28, 2014 9:37:38 GMT
Again we were too slow on the ball and lackadaisical in defence. I mean get it together at the back. Absolute amateur defending to allow a team to equalise at that stage. And we were on the back foot after that. Two points thrown away. Need to be slicker and quicker on the ball. More movement in support. It's not rocket science .we make teams look better than they are all the time. No reason why we can't go to Sutton and do a job on them if the team play to their best. A big if of course. Too many off boil at moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Dec 28, 2014 9:42:38 GMT
I think your being harsh on Chappell yellowalf there was definitely contact on him and he is the sort of player that would try and ride the challenge and go for goal rather than just dive !
We missed Gorman and Wales they should both be back for the return match
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Dec 28, 2014 12:49:18 GMT
Hemel might well have been lucky to start the second half with 11 men on the pitch. Chappell burst through on goal, but the ref signaled he got the ball despite asking the lino what he thought, which to me suggests he guessed. It would be interesting to see if anyone else had a better view because from my angle it looked a straight red, but I am happy to be proven wrong. At the time I thought it was a clear dive and a yellow for Chappell. Looking at the video I can't say for certain that the ball is touched by the defender although it does look as it if was. What is very clear, and confirms what I thought at the time, is that Chappell falls to the ground with both legs together as if they were tied at the ankles. That is not how the body falls if it is tripped up. There may well have been marginal contact but nowhere near enough contact to take Chappell off-balance and he tried for the foul rather than going on for goal. If he's going to get knocked to the ground by a feather then what is he doing on a football pitch? If there was even the slightest doubt in referee Chris O'Donnell's mind that it was a dive, I would bet my last rolo that he would have pulled out a yellow card faster than the speed of light. He has never once shown us any favours in the past, when officiating our games, in fact, quite the opposite. |
|
|
|
Post by COYS on Dec 28, 2014 13:37:07 GMT
My own view of the Chappell challenge was that it was a straight red. It looked to me as though it was Chappell who got the last touch, but the ref mistook it for the defender getting the ball. I don't think Chappell dived, the reason being it appeared as though he had the run on the defender had he not hit the deck. Having said that, it was a close thing and I don't think you can really begrudge the referee making the decision he did - there are three different views of the incident on this forum alone.
|
|
tudor
Saints Trialist
Posts: 50
|
Post by tudor on Dec 28, 2014 14:14:16 GMT
My own view of the Chappell challenge was that it was a straight red. It looked to me as though it was Chappell who got the last touch, but the ref mistook it for the defender getting the ball. I don't think Chappell dived, the reason being it appeared as though he had the run on the defender had he not hit the deck. Having said that, it was a close thing and I don't think you can really begrudge the referee making the decision he did - there are three different views of the incident on this forum alone. I was right in front of it and it was as clean a tackle as you could possibly see. The ball changes path in the exact direction of the challenge which is clearly shown on the replay. He's a crap ref (we get him a lot) but he got it spot on. |
|
|
|
Post by COYS on Dec 28, 2014 15:38:54 GMT
My own view of the Chappell challenge was that it was a straight red. It looked to me as though it was Chappell who got the last touch, but the ref mistook it for the defender getting the ball. I don't think Chappell dived, the reason being it appeared as though he had the run on the defender had he not hit the deck. Having said that, it was a close thing and I don't think you can really begrudge the referee making the decision he did - there are three different views of the incident on this forum alone. I was right in front of it and it was as clean a tackle as you could possibly see. The ball changes path in the exact direction of the challenge which is clearly shown on the replay. He's a crap ref (we get him a lot) but he got it spot on. Just had a look at the highlights myself and you're right, my initial feeling was a wrong one  |
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Dec 28, 2014 20:54:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Dec 28, 2014 21:27:52 GMT
St Albans City v Hemel Hempstead Town, 2014/15:
Tudor TV highlights. They list our manager as David Howell so they obviously research their opposition well....!
|
|
|
|
Post by asaintreborn on Dec 29, 2014 0:19:17 GMT
Difficult to see on the Hemel highlights, but on ours it does seem the defender gets a touch on the ball, which in that case is a quality challenge. I still had to watch it a fair few times to be 100% sure, so in real time despite Chris o'donnell not having a clue what to give, he simply guessed. At least the right call was made which is what matters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Dec 29, 2014 9:26:57 GMT
Not strictly true though, yes the decision looks correct but if he couldn't see that he is meant to give the advantage to the attacking player very grey area that ruling
|
|
