Aston Villa v Birmingham City, 12.00

JPA

Helix wrote: »

a win for city midweek and its gonna be in our own hands i reckon

That's not until the week after, and even then it's not in our hands unless Spurs drop points against Bolton or Burnley.

Helix

JPA wrote: »

That's not until the week after, and even then it's not in our hands unless Spurs drop points against Bolton or Burnley.

if city do them i cant see spurs taking maximum points from those 2

the pressure would be ridiculous on them. each of the 3 teams involved does better when chasing, rather than leading

id nearly say the team in 4th at kick off on the last day wont get it

monkey9

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Excellent stuff, Villa tired after 3 games in a week but still enough to show blues who's boss.

UTV

Indeed, the ref!!!!

Helix

monkey9 wrote: »

Indeed, the ref!!!!

about bleedin time we got a bit of luck

Mr Alan

oh martin. wat is he talking about!

JPA

Helix wrote: »

if city do them i cant see spurs taking maximum points from those 2

the pressure would be ridiculous on them. each of the 3 teams involved does better when chasing, rather than leading

id nearly say the team in 4th at kick off on the last day wont get it

I just don't see how Spurs cannot beat a relegated Burnley and a safe Bolton.
But I live in hope. And of course we have to beat City, a team we have a poor record against.

Bounty Hunter

monkey9 wrote: »

Indeed, the ref!!!!

nah MON, whats that 6 midlands derbys to nil for him?

JPA

Mr Alan wrote: »

oh martin. wat is he talking about!

What's he saying?

Helix

JPA wrote: »

I just don't see how Spurs cannot beat a relegated Burnley and a safe Bolton.
But I live in hope. And of course we have to beat City, a team we have a poor record against.

well since i was mistaken about the time of the city v spurs game, IF we were to beat city next week, spurs would go into their remaining 2 games knowing that they absolutely need maximum points to be safe for 4th... and city beating them could put them under the kind of pressure that (coupled with a dodgy lasagne) saw them buckle and let arsenal in a few seasons ago

matrim

Mr Alan wrote: »

oh martin. wat is he talking about!

What's he saying?

noodler

Pathetic from MON.

Really silly argument.

I can fly in and get the ball and then fell the man anywhere on the pitch - its not a foul.

monkey9

That was embarrassing by O' Neill. Bloody hell!!

Mr Alan

JPA wrote: »

What's he saying?

That he has seen the peno incident again and its definately a penalty and got pretty annoyed when the interviewer implied it wasn't.

Helix

JPA wrote: »

What's he saying?

havent seen it, but my money is on mon stock interview number 873:

"great performance, the lads gave it their all. we were absolutely fantastic and deserverd a bit of luck considering the decisions that have gone against us recently. i havent seen the replay but from the touchline it looked a clear penalty. we'll try to push on and see what we can do in our remaining 2 games, but nothing is certain even at this late stage"

JPA

Mr Alan wrote: »

That he has seen the peno incident again and its definately a penalty and got pretty annoyed when the interviewer implied it wasn't.

Sure it was a nailed on peno...

monkey9

Helix wrote: »

havent seen it, but my money is on mon stock interview number 873:

"great performance, the lads gave it their all. we were absolutely fantastic and deserverd a bit of luck considering the decisions that have gone against us recently. i havent seen the replay but from the touchline it looked a clear penalty. we'll try to push on and see what we can do in our remaining 2 games, but nothing is certain even at this late stage"

He did see the replay, but implied it was a peno!! Unbelievable.

I know Villa deserve that bit of luck, but that's nothing to do with Birmingham!

matrim

There's a small argument that the touch wasn't enough to take the ball away from Gabby if he hadn't been taken down, but in saying that I think we were very lucky to get it and it wasn't a peno.

Helix

was i right about the rest?

Mr Alan

he didn't imply it was a penalty, he angrily insisted it was definately a penalty-very strange.

Mr Alan

rest was pretty much spot on Helix

monkey9

Helix wrote: »

was i right about the rest?

Pretty much!!

ArmaniJeanss

noodler wrote: »

I can fly in and get the ball and then fell the man anywhere on the pitch - its not a foul.

This is completely untrue (or it was 15 years ago when I did my refs course). Even if you get the ball first it can still be a foul - if the referee judges it to be a reckless or dangerous challenge.

(Not a comment on this particular incident by the way, I'm undecided so I think therefore its not a penalty)

monkey9

matrim wrote: »

There's a small argument that the touch wasn't enough to take the ball away from Gabby if he hadn't been taken down, but in saying that I think we were very lucky to get it and it wasn't a peno.

But once Agbonlahor decides to fall to the ground, that arguement disappears. It's also not right at all!

I think he needs a new perscription for his glasses !

Aston Villa manager Martin O'Neill: "I can understand their frustration because they played well, but that's happened a lot to us this season. If they're disputing the decision there's no dispute about it because it's a penalty kick. I've seen it back since, and it's a penalty."

matrim

monkey9 wrote: »

But once Agbonlahor decides to fall to the ground, that arguement disappears. It's also not right at all!

There's a difference between deciding to fall to the ground and being taken down.

Also I agree that it wasn't a peno and the argument doesn't hold for this incident.

yahoo_moe

I can tell from the general consensus here that I'm gonna get mauled for this...

but I think it was a pen.

There's a touch on the ball but the difference between that and many other tackles you see is how far away the ball then goes. If it had been cleared properly, no foul, likewise if that tackle happens right beside the endline and the ball's out of play straight away. But in this case, the ball is still in play 6 yards from the endline and Agbonlahor is already ahead of the defender. So it's a foul.

The ref doesn't see Johnson's touch on the ball, so he hasn't made the decision for the reasons I've given above, but I think it's the right outcome.

Neil3030

Johnsons touch didn't take the ball far enough away from gabby that he couldnt have had a shot. He then followed through and took the man out. How is that not a foul?

Mr Alan

****s sake! Stop! its not a penalty. No way. Not a chance in hell.

yahoo_moe

yahoo_moe wrote: »

I can tell from the general consensus here that I'm gonna get mauled for this...

but I think it was a pen.

There's a touch on the ball but the difference between that and many other tackles you see is how far away the ball then goes. If it had been cleared properly, no foul, likewise if that tackle happens right beside the endline and the ball's out of play straight away. But in this case, the ball is still in play 6 yards from the endline and Agbonlahor is already ahead of the defender. So it's a foul.

The ref doesn't see Johnson's touch on the ball, so he hasn't made the decision for the reasons I've given above, but I think it's the right outcome.

Neil3030 wrote: »

Johnsons touch didn't take the ball far enough away from gabby that he couldnt have had a shot. He then followed through and took the man out. How is that not a foul?

He got the ball. Pretty simple really.

noodler

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

This is completely untrue (or it was 15 years ago when I did my refs course). Even if you get the ball first it can still be a foul - if the referee judges it to be a reckless or dangerous challenge.

(Not a comment on this particular incident by the way, I'm undecided so I think therefore its not a penalty)

It wasn't reckless or dangerous - not even close to it.

JPA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McOxoOSuX_8

HE GOT THE BALL!!!!

monkey9

So, because O' Neill embarrasses himself on live tv, Villa fans in here decide to do the same??! :rolleyes:

noodler

How high is Terry's boot there JPA?

Neil3030

Since nobody's bothered/able to respond to my point, I'm not going to respond to childish mud-slinging.

Great win today, roll on the next Blue city that stand in our way!

yahoo_moe

Mr Alan wrote: »

****s sake! Stop! its not a penalty. No way. Not a chance in hell.

rarnes1 wrote:

He got the ball. Pretty simple really.

Way to engage with the points that have been made, lads. Sorry but it's not as simple as 'he got the ball'.

Oh and monkey9, I'm an Arsenal fan.

SantryRed

Neil3030 wrote: »

Since nobody's bothered/able to respond to my point, I'm not going to respond to childish mud-slinging.

Great win today, roll on the next Blue city that stand in our way!

You're wrong. He got the ball. Who cares how far it went. He touched it. Yeah you won, but my god you were very fortunate, Birmingham were all over you second half.

invinciblePRSTV

monkey9 wrote: »

So, because O' Neill embarrasses himself on live tv, Villa fans in here decide to do the same??! :rolleyes:

The penalty is debatable alright but the only thing embarrassing here is whinging Pool fans who can't hide their dislike of MON, keep it up i'm enjoying reading it!:p

noodler

The penalty was not debatable.

I don't hate MON - ask Alan.

It was just the most childish and ungracious interview I have seen in quite a while.

Neil3030

SantryRed wrote: »

You're wrong. He got the ball. Who cares how far it went. He touched it. Yeah you won, but my god you were very fortunate, Birmingham were all over you second half.

It very much matters how far the ball went because Gabby was technically still in possession at the time Johnson cut him down like a tree.

I never said anything about Birmingham's performance, or Villa's deservedness of the win.

It was a penalty though.

Brum didn't take their chances and the bigger team got a decision that quite often isn't given. These things happen.

Xavi6

Neil3030 wrote: »

It very much matters how far the ball went because Gabby was technically still in possession at the time Johnson cut him down like a tree.

The ball was on its way out for a corner after an excellent touch by Johnson.

Shambles of a decision.

Neil3030

Xavi6 wrote: »

The ball was on its way out for a corner after an excellent touch by Johnson.

Shambles of a decision.

Nonsense! The pace of the ball barely changed and Gabby could comfortably have had a shot.

SuprSi

Xavi6 wrote: »

The ball was on its way out for a corner after an excellent touch by Johnson.

Shambles of a decision.

Agree with this, it was never a penalty. The touch that Johnson got, however slight, moved the ball faster than if Gabby had touched it himself, so he would not have been in control of it had he been able to continue.

noodler

Neil3030 wrote: »

It very much matters how far the ball went because Gabby was technically still in possession at the time Johnson cut him down like a tree.

I never said anything about Birmingham's performance, or Villa's deservedness of the win.

It was a penalty though.

Brum didn't take their chances and the bigger team got a decision that quite often isn't given. These things happen.

Pure, unadultrated drivel.

Xavi6

Neil3030 wrote: »

Nonsense! The pace of the ball barely changed and Gabby could comfortably have had a shot.

It's not nonsense. The defender got the ball with a superb covering tackle.

Agbonlahor went down after contact was made with the ball making it a clean tackle.

I really don't see how it can be argued otherwise.

Helix

wasnt a pen, but considering some of the abysmal decisions we've had this season i think we were due a bit of ref related luck tbh

Xavi6

Helix wrote: »

wasnt a pen, but considering some of the abysmal decisions we've had this season i think we were due a bit of ref related luck tbh

Lol with 17 penos for I think you've done alright in that regard

Helix

Xavi6 wrote: »

Lol with 17 penos for I think you've done alright in that regard

oddly, we shouldve had about 10 more on top of those

Neil3030

Xavi6 wrote: »

It's not nonsense. The defender got the ball with a superb covering tackle.

Agbonlahor went down after contact was made with the ball making it a clean tackle.

I really don't see how it can be argued otherwise.

Watch the replay again and ask yourself "could Gabby have had a shot after Johnson's contact with the ball."

The answer to that is an emphatic "yes."

Johnson's momentum then took Gabby out, therefore, foul.

Had Johnson have gotten a bit more on the ball, or knocked it away from goal, then yes, I'd agree with it not being a penalty. But that tackle was just short of being superb, and definitely in the category of foul.

monkey9

What is going on in here? How are people trying to claim this is a peno. I have no problem with O' Neill. I like him and think he's a good manager. I have no problem with Villa either.

It just wasn't a penalty. The defender got the ball with a brilliant tackle! If Liverpool had got that in the last minute at Old Trafford to win the game, i'd be delighted, but wouldn't go embarrassing myself by trying to say it was correctly awarded!!

SantryRed

Neil3030 wrote: »

Watch the replay again and ask yourself "could Gabby have had a shot after Johnson's contact with the ball."

The answer to that is an emphatic "yes."

Johnson's momentum then took Gabby out, therefore, foul.

Had Johnson have gotten a bit more on the ball, or knocked it away from goal, then yes, I'd agree with it not being a penalty. But that tackle was just short of being superb, and definitely in the category of foul.

It was not in the category of foul. Not at all. He got the ball, end of. Agbonlahor was clearly not in control of the ball as it had been touched by Johnson, Agbonlahor does not become in control of the ball again until he touches it again.