Everton benefit from questionable new directive

On opportunities alone you would say we deserved the win though it did come with quite a slice of luck.

Paul Traill 28/08/2016 68comments  |  Jump to last

For the second time in a week I visited Goodison Park rocking the shorts look, or the "C&A catalogue" look as one of the fellas in the pub teased, for an anticipated tough game against early strugglers Stoke City.

Exasperated with performances under Roberto Martinez, Gaz voted with his feet about midway through last season and stopped coming to the game. Excited with the change in management, Gaz returned to the match for this one, picking up Ste and me on route and we were in the pub in good time and saw the roof come off The Brick when Danny Rose half-volleyed the ball past Simon Mignolet to give Tottenham Hotspur a point against Liverpool.

We strolled on to Goodison Park and were in our seats in good time, Everton fielding what I would say is our best team with what we have available. Though I had initial reservations about Ashley Williams, he and captain Phil Jagielka represent a solid and experienced centre back pairing ahead of a fine goalkeeper in Maarten Stekelenburg with Mason Holgate deputising superbly at right back in the absence of Seamus Coleman. Gareth Barry and Idrissa Gueye represent a robust partnership in the midfield which most teams in the division would struggle to get the better of, whilst Yannick Bolasie and an in-form Kevin Mirallas offer quality on the flanks. If Ross Barkley can find consistency and when Romelu Lukaku rediscovers his goalscoring form, that should will be a match for most in the league I would suggest.

Stoke City on the other hand, for me at least, don't seem to be progressing. At times last season, I thought they looked like perhaps the most likely team to knock on the door of the Champions League. I quite liked their attitude on the pitch as well but they seemed to have reverted to the former Stoke CIty a little bit with niggly fouls in the game and ageing players still in the squad such as Peter Crouch, Shay Given, Jonathan Walters and Phil Bardsley. Though always a tough opponent, they don't seem to be progressing as they perhaps should be, and their poor start to the season reflects that. Anyway, less about them...

Article continues below video content

Michael Oliver frustrated the crowd throughout with a series of inconsistent decisions as the teams took to battle. It took a little time for either team to carve out anything meaningful, but as we slowly got into the swing of things we did create chances and were a little unfortunate not to be ahead at the break in what was a pretty meek first half. Ryan Shawcross cleared just short of the goalline from a Romelu Lukaku drive, Kevin Mirallas did well to spin onto his left foot and drive at Shay Given, Mirallas also tried his luck from the edge of the penalty area on a further couple of occasions, one which forced the veteran Irish international to palm the ball over the crossbar, and another an audacious overhead volley which drifted wide of the post, and, the closest of all, Peter Crouch did very well to acrobatically clear off the goalline from a Phil Jagielka header. It was fair to say that at the break we were on top, albeit with nothing to show for it.

Whilst we chatted at the break we were completely unaware of the horror that had occurred in the Park End when a 51-year-old fan took ill. How devastating that this gentleman later passed away in hospital at too young an age. A tragedy and you have to feel for the family.

If the first half was a little poor, the second was certainly much improved as, particularly once they went behind, Stoke City came out and played much more in what was a very end-to-end second half, which I thoroughly enjoyed.

Everton were extremely fortunate to get a penalty when Ashley Williams tumbled to the turf from a corner kick. As if Stoke City weren't unfortunate enough to concede the penalty, they were doubly unlucky with the goal when Leighton Baines stepped up, hitting the penalty low to Shay Given's left. The goalkeeper managed to flick the ball onto the post with his fingers only for the ball to rebound onto his back and into the Gwladys Street net. It was a relief to score but you had to feel a bit of sympathy for the Stoke City goalkeeper.

As for the penalty decision, whilst we welcome a bit of luck, the glut of penalties already this season for very, very little is alarming and the FA should really examine this new directive. It's all well and good when you're at the right end of these decisions, but can you imagine the uproar when Liverpool get a penalty for something like this against us? The FA have to be careful with this as the game is hanging onto its title of a "contact sport" by a thread as it is. Stoke City in particular will already feel heavily targeted by the directive this season.

Anyhow, the decision, and subsequent goal, did breathe life into the game and it was quite the ding-dong battle thereafter. Leighton Baines, Yannick Bolasie and substitute Arouna Kone all came close to wrapping the game up, whilst Stoke City will be ruing missed opportunities when Maarten Stekelenburg added another great save to his early Everton collection when he clipped the ball onto the crossbar from seemingly egotistical Marko Arnautovic. I don't know if we were genuinely interested in him this summer but I'm glad we didn't bring Arnautovic to the club. He was in the thick of the action for Stoke City's other good opportunity when, following a poor Yannick Bolasie clearance, he brought the ball into the penalty area and squared it to Jonathan Walters who perhaps should have been more alert as the ball was played across him. Kudos also to Stekelenburg who dominated his penalty area superbly in the second half.

On opportunities alone, you would say we deserved the win... though it did come with quite a slice of luck. Nevertheless, we welcome the three points and the excellent start to the season. It's great to sign off with a win heading into the international break and with the run of games coming up in September it's nice to start the season with optimism.

I'm convinced David Moyes will get one over on us in our next game at the Stadium of Light however!

Stekelenburg: Fair to say I'm a big fan, so much so that I'm happy we are not interested in Joe Hart. A great signing at a good price. 8

Baines: Did well. Got up and down the pitch to good effect, and though he isn't credited with the goal, it's nice to see him step up and take penalties again. Actually, I don't understand how Martinez managed to make such a pigs ear of our penalty situation. We had one of the best penalty takers in the league and he took him off them. How? Why? 7

Williams: Has slotted in seamlessly and distributes pretty well. He and Phil Jagielka are already looking pretty solid at the heart of defence. 8

Jagielka: Also solid, dependable and communicative. Good to have some leadership at the back between the two of them. 8

Holgate: I questioned his ability to perform at right back going forward but the young gem has all but banished those concerns after his latest terrific display. His defensive ability is not in question and little got past him today. However his confidence in attack also shone against Stoke City and makes me believe we don't have a requirement to bring in cover at right back in Coleman's absence anyway. A fantastic display and my Man of the Match. 9

Barry: Superb. The evergreen Gareth Barry shows no signs that he's nearing the end yet. So much so that James McCarthy is seemingly surplus to requirements. 8

Gueye: Another excellent display and he is fast becoming a fans favourite. 8

Mirallas: Had a barnstorming first half and wasn't doing badly in the second half until he was substituted for Arouna Kone. 7

Bolasie: Still finding his feet. He did very well at times but was out of the game for chunks also. Will become a great signing, I'm certain. 6

Barkley: At the match it didn't look as though he had his best game, but if you watch the highlights on Match of the Day he seemed very central to most of the good things we did. I think he lacks focus at times and can make wrong decisions but he is always a creative player which we need in the team. Hopefully Ronald Koeman and the management team can instil a bit more focus in our diamond. 6

Lukaku: He worked hard and played pretty selfishly. He was a bit of a menace for 70 minutes and then seemed to tire. No goals now in 12 league games though (make that 14 games in all competitions) does tell it's own story. Though there's little doubt he will get back to form eventually, he really needs to do it sooner rather than later. 6


Kone: Ran the channels, made himself available and created a few chances for himself. Has Arouna Kone played his way into the squad? 7

Funes Mori: He got rid of a few things at the back. Though I'm up on my feet when he scores for us, I'm not a big fan of him really. His rolling around on the floor every time he is fouled is really beginning to grate. 6

Davies: Though he saw little of the ball, he was busy and got about the pitch in the short time he had on the field. 6

Share article:

Reader Comments (68)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Mark Davidson
1 Posted 28/08/2016 at 16:24:37
It was Ashley Williams who had a header cleared off of the line by Crouch, wasnt it?
Dave Roberts
2 Posted 28/08/2016 at 17:24:15
It was a penalty. The only reason it seemed a bit soft was because we 'lesser' clubs don't usually get them. They are usually reserved for the Sky Four and the shite.
William Cartwright
3 Posted 28/08/2016 at 17:35:10
Spot on, Dave, so to speak...
Chris Gould
4 Posted 28/08/2016 at 17:36:18
Mmmmm...think we'd be pretty pissed off if it went against us. Looked like an accidental clash of legs. But accidental trips are still fouls and maybe it stopped Williams getting on the end of it, so...
Brent Stephens
5 Posted 28/08/2016 at 17:46:10
I don't think Williams threw himself, so anywhere else that probably would be given as a free kick. I'm glad they're not being scared to give pens. Long may it continue.
Dave Roberts
6 Posted 28/08/2016 at 17:52:16
It was a shove in the back by the defender's left forearm. While the game is conducive to physical contact that does not mean a foul contact should be ignored.

The shove put Williams of balance and the following leg contact sent him down not 'too easily' but because his centre of gravity passed way beyond his feet.

Gordon White
7 Posted 28/08/2016 at 17:57:33
I enjoyed reading this thank you. There is however one point on which I must disagree. I don't see the link between the new directive and this penalty decision. IMHO this was a penalty for a trip in the penalty area. Whether you think the ref got it right or not, it's as simple as that.

It's my view that the directive is principally aimed at the footballers who are all over the attacking team. Pulling back, arms all around, blatant obstruction, etc. The RS have been doing it for years. And very adept at it they've been. It's how teams like Stoke defend. Ryan Shawcross is a master of the dirty game. And it's cheating. No other word for it. It spoils the game and my enjoyment of it. It's about time something happened.

Look, if an Everton player gives away a penalty on a dubious refereeing decision, well, it wont be the first time. But if they were pulling back, arms all round an attacker, then it's a penalty. As the little rodent says "simples". No argument.

I think most fans want their team to win because they played well, not because they're accomplished cheats.

Gordon White
8 Posted 28/08/2016 at 17:58:49
Chris #4 exactly!
You summed it up very well. :-)
Stan Schofield
9 Posted 28/08/2016 at 18:13:32
I don't think Everton did benefit from the new directive. It was a penalty according to the laws of the game with or without the new directive.
Garry Corgan
10 Posted 28/08/2016 at 18:18:57
What bollocks. The new directive isn't questionable in the slightest - its proper enforcement of existing rules. Holding, pushing, blocking have always been fouls and, for me, it's great to see the rules finally being properly applied.

Having had that little rant, I wouldn't have said yesterday's incident warranted a penalty. All I saw was a tangle of legs with no intent.

Gary Mortimer
11 Posted 28/08/2016 at 18:24:41
Goals on Sunday went on about how Liverpool's pen was just outside the box, but it was a foul as Lamella tapped his ankle. Now when they showed our game, they said it wasn't a penalty as Bardsley didn't mean to tap Williams ankle – it was just a coming together.

Some things never change – one rule for the media friendly teams and another for us duffers!!!

Garry (10) – I don't think intent matters. If you accidentally stop someone getting to the ball in the box by being too tight, it is still a penalty in my book.

Martin Mason
12 Posted 28/08/2016 at 18:25:53
To be fair, the slo-mo on sky showed no contact between the defenders arm and Williams just an accidental clash between William's trailing foot and the defenders left knee. No basis for a penalty but where Shawcross took the risk was in raising his arms and looking as though he was pushing Williams. These are percentage decisions though and you get some and some you don't get; we normally don't get them. We deserved to win regardless and did our best to miss it anyway.

Just watched City Vs WHU, they are good.

Tom Bowers
13 Posted 28/08/2016 at 18:39:56
Sometimes referees can only give what they can see and being human sometimes see things differently and only for a split second.

Penalties become goals and can change games but so often we all become frustrated when it appears linesmen and referees view something blatant from both angles and give nothing, as in the Hull game yesterday.

I applaud the league's new get tough attitude with all the holding and clutching in the box as it has allowed many penalty incidents go unchecked and basically fostered dirty defending as it is mainly the defenders who do it.

Referees would take the easy way out and penalise the attacking player far too often.

Jeff Armstrong
14 Posted 28/08/2016 at 18:52:18
Paul, I always enjoy your reports... another good one with a few subjective ratings. I agree about Funes Mori and McCarthy, I think they are both good to have on the bench though, but I don't think McCarthy will settle for that.

We deffo need another striker before Wednesday's deadline. Kone has done okay in the last two sub appearances but he's not the answer. Lukaku didn't know when to pass or shoot yesterday, and made the wrong choice quite a few times. l really wonder if he will start scoring again cos overall I think he's a shit footballer.

Dave Roberts
15 Posted 28/08/2016 at 18:53:18
I don't know from what angle Sky's slo-mo was taken but my own slo-mo taken from a recording of MOTD shows Bardsley chasing Williams into the area. He then shoves Williams in the back at which Williams starts to fall. It would be one hell of a coincidence if Williams decided to dive just as Bardsley was shoving his hand out towards his back! As he falls and slows down, Bardsley catches him up and at that point there is a tangle of legs. But the foul has already been committed in the push. It is very difficult to see from the TV camera position until you slow it down but from the referees position he would have had a clear view.

If you have the game recorded have a look and slow it down yourself. When you see it in slo-mo it is obvious what has happened.

While all this is happening by the way, Shawcross has his arms wrapped around Lukaku and another defender has his arms wrapped around Barry and holding him back. Whichever way you look at it there is a penalty in there somewhere!

I appreciate that even Slo-mo may not be conclusive but Williams had no reason to fall. He was running into space with the prospect of a good header from the corner. Oh, and by the way, a 'tangle of legs' or whatever does NOT have to be with intent to deserve a penalty just as a handball in the area does not have to be intentional. Take no notice of the fucking 'pundits' who might think otherwise.

Martin Mason
17 Posted 28/08/2016 at 19:41:52

What the sky recording showed was Bardsley aiming to push Williams but making no contact with his hands mainly because Williams was already pitching forward from an accidental contact between his heel and Bardsley's knee. Not even a tangle of legs and it may be that this is a penalty offence but perhaps it was as the commentators said accidental contact. This contact was clear, the non-contact with the hand was also clear so there was no penalty for pushing for me at least. Perhaps some others could give their views, no penalty was unanimous from the Sky punters and it looked correct to me.

Of course I realise that Sky pundits are only ex-players who have spent a life in the game and can't possibly know as much as fans. I really can't understand why fans aren't invited on to give their expert opinion on games, club's performance in the transfer market and general mistakes that boards make in the running of clubs. :-)

Dave Abrahams
19 Posted 28/08/2016 at 20:16:33
Forget the sarcasm, Martin, I tell you why I take little notice of TV pundits, especially on MotD. I watched one of them tell viewers how great a game Fellaini had in an Everton game at Goodison, he gave about six illustrations showing how good Fellaini had done. I had been to that game and could have shown another six illustrations in how poor Fellaini had been.

They watch the match in the evening after the game has been played and just pick out situations that suits their summary of the game. You might agree with them, Martin; you only watch football on TV for reasons you have explained.

Martin Mason
20 Posted 28/08/2016 at 20:34:46
Dave, by watching on TV I see far more of the game than you do watching it live especially at Goodison which is a nightmare and from anywhere behind the goal at any ground because of the depth problem. The arc of view of the camera is at least equal to that of a human and I get the exceptional benefit of replays and opinion that I can take or leave, some of which is exceptional especially from Jamie Redknapp, Carragher, Henry, Neville, etc. What I also get is the names of all of the opposition players as they play the ball where most match goers have little clue who has done what from the opposition.

I've done my decades of following Everton everywhere but that was in the days when the atmosphere was dominant in my enjoyment and the strange wish to say that I was there. I've flown from Malaysia to England just to watch Everton play but I won't now. I watch it from the best place to watch all sports which is my armchair.

I saw the issue differently to you Dave, that's all, and I don't necessarily share your view that Sky commentators are wrong just because of what they are. You should also see that I put a smiley there to show that I was pulling your leg so stop taking yourself so seriously and get over it.

Many thanks

Jeff Armstrong
21 Posted 28/08/2016 at 21:19:59
Dave, spot on. Barkley was awful yesterday, but to the armchair/highlights fan, he had a good game. Allardyce was at the game yesterday, guess who's not in his squad tonight?

I'm sorry for all you ToffeWebbers who cannot get to Goodison. MOTD or Sky's Goals on Sunday are absolutely no measure of a 90-minute game.
Dave Abrahams
22 Posted 28/08/2016 at 21:20:45
Martin I know you do gobilly dook perfectly but which Dave was you referring to in your last paragraph.

By the way I was not having a go at you for not going to live games, I know you have family concerns which take up quite a lot of your time.

That smiley you put on must have gone for a walk if was meant for me it wasn't on my thread, Martin you never bother me I find you very funny in a strange way.

Dave Roberts
23 Posted 28/08/2016 at 21:32:56

Firstly, I think you are getting your Daves mixed up. You appear to be replying to me when it was actually Dave Abrahams who picked you up regarding sarcasm.

It is of no concern to me if you prefer to watch Everton on TV rather than at Goodison but I do take issue with your general view that you can see more than I do from, let us say, the Bullens Road Upper Stand.

The only explanation that I can think of is that you have tunnel vision or you have some difficulty moving your eyes because from your TV you can only see what the television cameras show you which at best is about a third of the pitch which is applicable to ball watching. So whereas I can glance at who is running off the ball, who is covering while the full back raids up the wing or who is running late into the area a la Tim Cahill (or Williams in this instance) from your armchair you cannot do so. You cannot in any respect see more from your 48" HD Samsung than you can from being at Goodison. It may be more comfortable in many respects, especially with a few cans in the fridge, but your comprehension of the game in such comfort is severely limited.

Neither do I require the likes of Jamie Carragher to tell me what I should think of what I have just seen with my own eyes from the Upper Bullens. All he and his ilk offer is an opinion which has no greater value than mine or yours for that matter. The only difference is, he gets a million quid a year for offering his, I usually keep mine to myself except when I hear or read stupid opinions like that was not a penalty.

I hope this clarifies the matter for you.

Mike Allison
24 Posted 28/08/2016 at 21:53:51
The directive is a good one, but yesterday's wasn't a penalty. Actually the legs only got tangled because Bardsley had to run round Jagielka.

Still, going back over the years we're owed about 19 more penalties against Stoke anyway, so fuck them.

Martin Mason
25 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:02:19
Dave Roberts, are you seriously saying you can see 100% of the pitch while play is ongoing? At the ground you see a very small patch around where the action is. At the ground you see nothing and yet believe you see everything because you were there. Watching live events follows the theory of madness of crowds. For what you see at football think about what you see as a driver, a very small area just in front of your car. You can make no sense of the game until you go back and watch it on TV and that is fact. You quote what you saw on MotD rather than what you saw at the ground, at the ground you didn't even see the incident.

At the ground, with no benefit of replay nobody would have had a clue what happened to Baine's penalty. Everybody would have believed that Shawcross pushed Williams for a penalty

Brent Stephens
26 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:11:52
Martin, we can both choose to watch a replay. But that will only show the limited view available live on TV.

Attending the match, I can choose to look at something outside of the scope of the TV camera which the TV viewer doesn't have the luxury of.

Martin Mason
27 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:22:30
Yes but you can't do them both together. You can look at a narrow view of play or narrow view of inaction. The TV coverage can and does do both. My view is when you watch live football you only get a very broad view of what happens which is dictated by the atmosphere around you. If you didn't see the game on MotD you wouldn't have a clue what actually happened. Otherwise why watch MotD
The view available to TV isn't limited, it is far better than what the eye would see
John Daley
28 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:23:30
"You can make no sense of the game until you go back and watch it on TV and that is fact"

Absolute bollocks.

So, everybody in the ground...those sat in the stands, those on the bench, those out actually playing on the pitch...all wander out the ground after a game wondering what the fuck happened there?

I've never watched a game, thought 'he was great' but 'so and so was wank', subsequently watched a recording of it and found I had to completely reverse my opinion. I've never gone home believing Everton thoroughly deserved to win only to later find out from Jamie Carragher that they were lucky as fuck (well, ok, that one I have but I refused to believe him on grounds of squawky twanged twatishness).

If you can't ever make sense of a game while it is ongoing, unless you're sat in front of a tv screen, then how does a manager respond and react to what is unfurling right in front of his eyes? Does he just pull any old tactical change or switch of personnel out of his arse then clench those cheeks tightly until he gets home later that night, when he can finally confirm whether he had real reason to make the decision he made...by hitting the red button on Match Choice?

Shane Corcoran
29 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:29:44
I'll be happy enough as long as I don't have to hear about how unlucky we are.

This season we've had a fortunate goal against Spurs, a fortunate penalty award yesterday, a fortunate goal yesterday and then the Arnautovic/Walters miss.

I know this is off-topic but I just wanted to say it. We are not unlucky.

I feel better now.

Martin Mason
30 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:31:40
The last time I went to see the game at Goodison I sat in the lower Gladwys street and saw nothing because whenever the ball came to that end the dickheads who sit there all stand up.

How does a manager react to the game? He watches videos and then tries to learn from what actually happened as opposed to what he thought happened. Unlike most fans the manager understands what he is seeing in front of him.

John Daley
31 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:42:08
"I know this is off-topic but I just wanted to say it. We are not unlucky."

It will be bang on topic if you say whether you reached that decision after watching on tv though, Shane. It could also grant your statement an automatic air of authority not attainable by those cyclopian numpties who cock-block themselves from the finer nuances of a game by actually going the game.

Dave Roberts
32 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:44:08

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. In fact, with the aid of peripheral vision I probably can see 100% of the pitch from the Upper Bullens (apart from the bit blanked by the roof support and the silly hat of the bloke in front of me!) At least in the sense of 'seeing' an opposition shirt readying itself for a break if our attack breaks down or I have no 'sense' of a blue shirt covering Baines for instance if he's on a raid up the left wing. But that is not what I was suggesting.

What I am saying is that even amidst the excitement of an Everton attack I can still glance to see what is happening elsewhere on the pitch. Just a quick look to see if a midfielder is running up to offer support or to see if the defence is covered in case of a defender's clearance down the middle etc. It is that which you cannot do watching on the television because you can only see what the camera shows you. Sometimes if an attack is underway the cameras zoom in on little more than the penalty area so that you have no idea what is happening elsewhere on the pitch not even peripherally.

Have you ever watched a goal scored on TV and it was obvious it was offside? Then a view from another camera shows the defender just out of view of the main shot playing everybody onside. That is what you cannot see on TV. It is not even the case that you are guaranteed to see it from the Upper Bullens but if I take a glance I just might do so. And that is why I do take glances because the game is not only where the ball is.

John Daley
33 Posted 28/08/2016 at 22:54:10
How does he react during a game if it's a fact he "can't make no sense of the game" until he's watched it on tv?

You're saying every manager in the game is making senseless decisions based on a possible misunderstanding, misreading, of what is actually occurring out on the pitch because he hasn't referred to a monitor showing action replays before making such decisions. Meanwhile, the one guy with a true understanding... the guy at home in his undercrackers, drinking Um-Bongo and crushing crisps between two slices of bread covered in Utterly Butterly...is either nodding his head sagely or screaming his fucking house down, depending on whether an effectively blind manager has blundered his way to a correct call.

Joe Clitherow
34 Posted 28/08/2016 at 23:12:59

I seriously have never heard so much rubbish spouted by you on this site, which is quite a statement. No TV camera has the peripheral vision of the human eye; no cameramen can move the camera with the speed of an eyeball flicked from side to side which then can flick back almost instantly to take in the whole ground in a fraction of a second. No microphone picks up the real sound of a game. Since you mention MOTD, well I can go home and watch that as well as my view in the ground whereas you can't get the view I have had by attending.

John D just to expand on your manager point, which is obviously correct, then logically the players themselves cannot understand what is going on in the game either, so they must just be booting the ball in vague directions and hoping for the best rather than playing with any sort of tactical understanding of what is happening around them. Logically of course, there could have been no sort of tactical understanding of football at all before retrospective viewing in the 60s, or live games in the 80s (the Cup Final and internationals excepted).

Just laughable.

Dan Davies
35 Posted 28/08/2016 at 23:15:57
Quite partial to Um-Bongo John ha ha! Although Martin's theory does make sense when it comes to the new Belgian manager.
Garry Corgan
36 Posted 28/08/2016 at 23:22:19
Gary (11) - In the instance to which I was referring, the intent matters only because I think it was a clash of legs. I didn't see a trip, deliberate or otherwise - just two players' legs trying to occupy the same space!
Douglas McClenaghan
37 Posted 28/08/2016 at 23:28:32
Gosh, I came to this thread to bask in the celebration of a meritorious Everton win. Off to GOT now.
Derek Thomas
38 Posted 29/08/2016 at 01:59:08
As usual Paul a nice/different slant on things.

The only questionable thing(s) about the decision is;

1) How/why it took them so long to get a grip on it and...

2) how/why have they managed to make such a pigs ear of enforcing it.

If they were doing properly, eg actually aiming to stamp it out, there should be a dozen penalties per 10 games, which would go down to 9, 6, 3, 2, 1, 0 as teams slowly twigged.

On the game; Yes we got a bit 'lucky', but the old golfing quote of; The more I practice ( or in footballing terms - apply my self to the job in hand in a none Martinez manner) the 'luckier' I seem to get' might fit the bill here.

It's early days yet; Koeman said 2 yrs. While taking that under advisement, the baby steps he's taken so far all seem to be in the right direction.

Tony Draper
39 Posted 29/08/2016 at 02:01:16
"I don't understand how Martinez managed to make such a pigs ear of our penalty situation. We had one of the best penalty takers in the league and he took him off them. How? Why? "

Because, Ole Bean, RM fiddle faddled with those things which worked quite well or better, but managed to deliberately ignore the very things which most required attention.

My Grandad once advised me "Listen son, it's those little giveaways that tell you everything. They've always played upon your mind, but when the penny drops, it doesn't really come as a surprise."

(Such as a man who insists upon wearing brown shoes with a navy suit. Daring ? Or just bloody contrary for contrary's sake ?).

Tony Draper
40 Posted 29/08/2016 at 02:37:42
Oh, and popping back on topic.

"Everton benefit from questionable new directive"
We did ?
Could that be because we have been "decent chaps" and consequently have had "The Royal Piss" taken out of us by shit-house yard dogs for donkeys years ?
I feel less than fuck all sympathy for these "Bill Sykes" style pickpockets, burglars and ne'erdowells.

Tough shit gobshite !
Rough justice this may seem, but the mrtn skrtl's n ryn shwcrss's are getting their long overdue invoices. Fuckem.

The next directive really should address the "Oh Vic ! I've fallen", school of theatricality, also being practiced by the "deeply afflicted" Stoke-on-Trent school of "Drama and Wrestling".

David Ellis
41 Posted 29/08/2016 at 03:09:23
Three comments here
1. Watching on TV gives you far less sense of the game and in particular the contribution of players than watching live. I know...I watch on TV from Hong Kong. I am awe-stuck by the difference when I watch a live match. Koeman says most football is played without the ball - this is almost entirely missed on TV. Also if you watch the game live you can always watch it on TV later to see the microscope view as well.
2. Williams was tripped. Tripping if careless, reckless or using excessive force, is a penalty if it occurred in the penalty area. This is nothing to do with the new directive. TV commentators keep saying "there was no intention". This is not relevant - they need to learn the laws of the game so they can commentate on it. The debate should have been about whether it was careless or reckless. I my view this was an accidental challenge...but clearly careless (as he had tried to push him before accidentally tripping Williams). Stone cold penalty.
3. I am delighted with the new directive - corners were much better to watch. Consistency will come as players offend less - initially it is very hard to police when there are 6 off the ball fouls going on simultaneously and they are not fouls until the ball is actually in play - no way a referee can look at all of these things at once.
David Ellis
42 Posted 29/08/2016 at 03:12:52
And just to be at total nerd here is the definition of "careless", "reckless" and "excessive force"

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

Nigel Gregson
43 Posted 29/08/2016 at 04:11:19
Tony draper - totally agree. The wrestling in the penalty boxes have hurt us big time in the last 2-3 seasons. Its ridiculous, but we encourage it in the UK - "part of the game" according to all the pundits. To them I say - No its fucking not. You want to play a contact sport, go try rugby.
Alan J Thompson
44 Posted 29/08/2016 at 06:13:31
John D(#28&33); All managers wear Dick Tracey watches which is why they stand there arms folded so they can look down and see the replay.
I know this true, I saw it on the telly.
Martin Nicholls
45 Posted 29/08/2016 at 08:57:35
Martin#30 - so fans in the Lower Gladys are "all dickheads" because they stand up (something we all used to do at football grounds) when something exciting happens? I am usually at the match, home and away, but on the rare occasion I see one of our live matches from my armchair I have been known to leap to my feet on occasion as I'm sure you have. A very unfortunate remark to make about your fellow Evertonians Martin - I'd stop digging if I were you.
Eddie Dunn
46 Posted 29/08/2016 at 09:06:07
On the new directive to referees, I for one am very pleased with it. I have been so sick of watching the ridiculous grabbing, bear-hugging and pushing in the box on corners and free kicks. The worst culprits were that ugly bastard Skritle and Shawcross, but even our own Ashley Williams managed a few outrageous grapples during the Euros.
The refs need to enforce it consistently ,and once the message is out there ,the protagonists will stop it for obvious reasons.

Eddie Dunn
47 Posted 29/08/2016 at 09:18:22
Oh, and Martin, I have to disagree with you on the subject of TV versus pitchside viewing. I know that telly can show details that we miss at the match, but the cameramen/directors are obsessed with focusing on smaller areas of the pitch and close-ups of the action which comes over nice and clear on the television screen. However if I watch a televised game I usually have no idea of who is working hard off the ball, who is shouting to teammates, or making runs off camera .
The editing starts with the camera, and of course continues with the director's choice of angles etc, and by the time it gets filleted for MOTD, it can put a very distorted version of the game.
Shane Corcoran
48 Posted 29/08/2016 at 09:36:01
John Daley, not sure if you're having a go at me or Martin there but it was so well put I don't care.

My point stands, regardless of where you watch the game, that we are not any more unlucky than any other team. This year, after three games, I would suggest we've been more fortunate than most.

Dave Williams
49 Posted 29/08/2016 at 10:12:38
I can't believe we are arguing that it could be better to watch a game on TV.

I live 270 miles from Goodison and only see a few live games a year so depend on Sky Sports and BT Sport but the only way to fully appreciate a game is to be there regardless of how good or not the view might be. TV highlights are exactly that – highlights! They don't show the bad passes, the poor decision-making, the lack of effort by certain players (not referring to this season here) and they can build a players reputation by showing the good stuff and cutting out the bad. Okay, the action replays can enable us to fully understand what might have happened – the penalty award was one of those – but if I don't go to the game, then I would far rather rely on Paul, Lyndon, Michael or Ken to give a view on how a player performed than rely on my own view based on what has now been cut to around 20 minutes of action on Football First (I thought we had an hour of this last season??).

As for 'unlucky', I think Tony Draper sums it up beautifully. Stoke have defended corners for years as if the late Mick McManus (infamous wrestler, for you younger Webbers) had coached them and for Hughes to have the brass neck to moan about conceding penalties is priceless. If these new rules were applied retrospectively Stoke would have finished in the bottom three every year due to the number of penalties they should have conceded. Stoke and RS have flouted the rules for years and whilst yesterday's was arguable they have played with fire for years and sometimes they will come unstuck and maybe their reputation influenced the ref.

Dave Williams
50 Posted 29/08/2016 at 10:16:32
ps: The perfect example yesterday was Gana. All of our "reporters" have raved about him as did the commentary team on The official website but on Football First he put in one tackle and maybe two passes. Snowden said Ross had one of those games when nothing went right yet on TV he looked pretty good.

Live at the match cannot be beaten!

Dave Williams
51 Posted 29/08/2016 at 10:17:49
Snodin - not Snowden!!
Martin Mason
52 Posted 29/08/2016 at 10:22:15

In all seater stadiums, everybody in areas like lower Gladwys Street would be able to see if people remained seated or remained standing. That doesn't happen though, what happens is that people stay seated until the ball comes near to that goal and they then stand. Yes, people who do that are dickheads because if they stayed seated they'd see more. Not all fans in LGS btw, only those who stand when the ball approaches making everybody else do the same if they want to see.

Watching on TV you can effectively see the game from the best seat in the ground with no restricted view. The only downside is that atmosphere can't be generated on TV.

David Ellis
53 Posted 29/08/2016 at 10:22:42
Dave (#50),

Gana looked fab on live TV as well. Got my goat a bit watching MotD later show clip after clip of Kante making interceptions for Chelsea – EXACTLY what Gana did for us – very similar players and glad that ours didn't cost £30m.

Martin Mason
54 Posted 29/08/2016 at 10:24:38
Dave@49, I'm talking only about games that are fully televised not highlights.
David Ellis
55 Posted 29/08/2016 at 10:34:41
Martin (#54) – even so you see much more live at the game than fully televised matches – all the off-the-ball movement etc.

Like you, I'm an expat in the Far East and have to watch on TV... but at least that allows us to see every match live... which I don't think is always available in the UK, hence they sometimes assume we are watching highlights.

Brent Stephens
56 Posted 29/08/2016 at 10:38:01
What was that game, against the rs perhaps, when we scored but we didn't see it on TV as the goal went in – because they were showing a replay of a previous incident. So much for your all-seeing TV.
Terry Underwood
57 Posted 29/08/2016 at 11:48:24
The new directive is brilliant. If the ball is on the halfway line and you climb all over someone and pull his shirt, you concede a free kick. It is solely down to the lack of balls on the part of the officials that this wrestling has been allowed in the penalty area.

We are already starting to see less holding and tugging, long may it continue. All we need now is for someone to pick up two bookings for diving and you never know, a game of football may break out somewhere

Martin Nicholls
58 Posted 29/08/2016 at 13:23:09
Martin (#52) – you seem to be in a very small minority on this thread but of course we're all entitled to our opinions.

I just think you are out of order to refer to significant numbers of your fellow Blues as "dickheads" – in doing so you insult every single one of our magnificent away following, including myself and my mates, as ALL such fans stand up.

I can assure you that we are not dickheads and whilst we do have a small number who you could attach the label to, it is NOT because they stand up!

Martin Mason
59 Posted 29/08/2016 at 13:51:11
Martin, I made no reference to our magnificent travelling fans or any other Evertonians other than those who stand up behind the goal when the action comes near. Dickheads in a most affectionate way of course but nonetheless as there is no reason to stand up. Do you not think of the effect that you have on others when you arbitrarily take away the view that they had?

Doesn't affect me now of course because when I go I sit in Bullens road where nobody feels the need to stand up during the game, wouldn't you agree that they are the large majority?

I'd fully support standing areas for those who want but once areas are made all seating I believe it's up to the club to stop people standing and up to fans to have the decency not to during general play.

As a you say I have a right to my opinion on what I see as a basic right for people who buy a seat to see the game. I'm also not going to get into conflict over it so this is my last word.

John Hughes
60 Posted 29/08/2016 at 14:55:51
Martin Mason (59) your last sentence is your last word – thank Christ for that.

ps: You dickhead COYB.

Dave Abrahams
61 Posted 29/08/2016 at 15:42:02
Martin. (59) is this your last word ever? If it is, the sale of Aspros in Liverpool will slump overnight.
Tony Kost
62 Posted 29/08/2016 at 16:04:46
Had to laugh watching MotD – it made a big fuss of Robert Huth being "wrestled" to the ground in the box by two Swansea defenders. Huth and Wes Morgan have doing that all last season for Leicester and getting away with it – so pot calling kettle.

Huth and Morgan and others have done it because they were allowed to. A bit like "dubious penalties!" – of which EFC was pretty much nailed on – but it was given for a change. Consistency of application of the "new rules" – we'll see!

Iain Johnston
63 Posted 29/08/2016 at 16:17:06
If standing when a team move gets exciting means I'm a dickhead, then fine, I'll embrace it.

After two years of nervously sitting there getting a square numb arse, this new found exercise routine is doing me the world of good both mentally & physically...

To my fellow dickheads, REJOICE! and long may it continue!

Steven Jones
64 Posted 30/08/2016 at 09:03:17
Williams was running into space in the penalty area and was taken down from behind; defender was trying to stop him and therefore was intent on getting to him physically, got careless and too close and took him down...

Simple – Penalty.

ps: Rebound penalties off the keeper should be treated as deflections and Baines given the goal. Keeper actually touched it onto the post so should be considered as going in till deflection.

Shane Corcoran
65 Posted 30/08/2016 at 10:13:03
Steven, the ball was moving away from the goal once it hit the post.

If Given's touch brought it on target then fine, it's Baines's goal. As it stands it was a clear o.g.

Steavey Buckley
66 Posted 30/08/2016 at 10:22:11
Too many goal keepers in the Premier League and throughout the world are basically shot-stoppers, who have difficulty coming out for crosses and corners and cleanly catching them. That is why defenders have taken matters into their own hands and stop the opposition in their tracks by holding on to them. Under these circumstances, FIFA have tried to rewrite the balance by directing all referees to make holding on to players a penalty offence.

Although I agree with the players ratings for Everton against Stoke, too many of the higher ratings for Everton players were for defenders Yet, if Everton are to be a force this season, more attacking players should have higher ratings than defenders. After all said and done, Everton were only playing Stoke.

Franny Porter
67 Posted 30/08/2016 at 16:43:30
I sit in the Top Balcony, Row B and my view is superb; you can see everything, offsides, runs, passes before they happen.

When I was away on holiday, I watched us play a pre-season game on telly in 'lo def' and I genuinely had no idea who Kone was as he hadn't dyed his hair!

Jon Cox
68 Posted 30/08/2016 at 19:08:44
John D,

I laughed so much with some of your comments

I dug this up especially for you!!


Rick Tarleton
69 Posted 31/08/2016 at 06:54:01
We've all been complaining for years about the grabbing and blocking in the box at set pieces; now something's being done, people are complaining, it's wrong. It isn't wrong – it's applying the laws.

To me it stems from the failure to impose the law for obstruction, which seemed to disappear from the game two or three decades ago. Blocking a player from getting the ball is not strong defending, it's obstruction, as is holding, or keeping your arms up, so they can't get past.

I honestly don't care if there's six penalties a game if it gets rid of this mayhem. I am aware that unless other countries have referees that impose the same standards, there'll be problems in European games, but it'd still be a good initiative for our referees to take.

Kase Chow
70 Posted 31/08/2016 at 07:25:35
Totally agree Rick #69

What are people complaining about? The FA can't win.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.

About these ads

© ToffeeWeb