No hard feelings.....

[Onlyregisteredtogloat]

Just a little stat for you. Saints have not lost any points after taking the lead in our last 36 games (excluding the cup game against Man Utd) I saw no evidence on Saturday of that stat changing considering Brighton's lack of creativity & aerial threat in the final third.

The game could well have finished 1-0 if it makes some of you feel better about the pens & sending off. If Brighton had pushed forward in the last 15 mins really going for it, just as likely that Saints would have hit you on the break and made the game safe.

Better team won, thankfully I think the majority of Brighton fans do appreciate that.

Gloating aside, I would agree with those who say your team is not big enough physically all over the park. I was also relieved you didn't play Lua Lua as Saints full backs have yet to be tested by a nippy winger this season and as well as they are playing, I think genuine pace maybe something we would struggle with. So thanks to Poyet for leaving him on the bench.

Good luck with the rest of the season.

 

[gwc]

Indiscipline? I think your players should learn to stay on their feet a bit better. Given you lot spent all season grizzling that we just dived and moaned at the ref you've really caught up in that sense. Still surrounding the referee at half time clearly worked as it bullied him in to giving two of the worst decisions you are likely to see on Saturday afternoon. Take note Gus!

We moaned certainly. Not going to argue there, but we had several clear penalties denied, I think we had the right to a little moan.

As for staying on our feet. Maybe a fair point. Hammond made a meal of Harper's tackle, though there was contact. Other than that we went down due to being fouled. Navarro was lucky to stay on the pitch.

The two biggest dives of the day were done by Tarricco and CMS, both in the first ten minutes. Didn't come here for an argument though, I think the stats all season will show you have a problem with discipline, and I think the tackling and the diving and the surrounding of the referee is something that Gus encourages.

 

[Perry Milkins]

From the highlights that I saw it seemed that Stains pushed Lambert out a litle wider so that he would be taking on (bullying) Painter in the air and getting the better of him.

 

[gwc]

From the highlights that I saw it seemed that Stains pushed Lambert out a litle wider so that he would be taking on (bullying) Painter in the air and getting the better of him.

I would pick out Painter and possibly Noone as your worst players on Saturday.

 

[Arthur]

We moaned certainly. Not going to argue there, but we had several clear penalties denied, I think we had the right to a little moan.

As for staying on our feet. Maybe a fair point. Hammond made a meal of Harper's tackle, though there was contact. Other than that we went down due to being fouled. Navarro was lucky to stay on the pitch.

The two biggest dives of the day were done by Tarricco and CMS, both in the first ten minutes.

You must have been watching a different game to me then as I didn't think any of them we're clear penalties. The only one I thought was a foul was Dunk on Lambert toward the end of the first half but if referees start giving penalties for that they'll be 20 in every game.

As for the biggest dive surely that accolade goes to Lambert (I think) for the second penalty. Or Hammond when he was rightly booked or Fonte for the first penalty which a) wasn't a foul and b) was a country mile outside of the box.

Don't get me wrong I don't think we would have got anything out of the game as we never looked in it, the better team certainly won. Just strikes me as double standards given the way you lot moaned about how we played last year.

 

[gwc]

You must have been watching a different game to me then as I didn't think any of them we're clear penalties. The only one I thought was a foul was Dunk on Lambert toward the end of the first half but if referees start giving penalties for that they'll be 20 in every game.

As for the biggest dive surely that accolade goes to Lambert (I think) for the second penalty. Or Hammond when he was rightly booked or Fonte for the first penalty which a) wasn't a foul and b) was a country mile outside of the box.

Don't get me wrong I don't think we would have got anything out of the game as we never looked in it, the better team certainly won. Just strikes me as double standards given the way you lot moaned about how we played last year.

Depends what you call a dive I suppose. For me a dive is when there is no contact.

Both Hammond and Lambert went down under contact. Did they make a meal of it? Perhaps, but contact still means foul.

The Fonte one was absolutely bizzarre. There was clearly contact, but was it inside the box? Not in a million years. Was it a foul? Probably not. Not a dive though either. CMS and Tarrico both went down like they had been shot, rolling around holding their legs after being fairly tackled.

I am not naive enough to say our players never do it. Every club does it these days, it is very much part of the game, but it is possible to go down, when it isn't a foul, without it being a dive as such.

 

[leigull]

I am not naive enough to say our players never do it. Every club does it these days, it is very much part of the game, but it is possible to go down, when it isn't a foul, without it being a dive as such.

Perfect case of this being Lua Lua against Doncaster. He was booked for diving, when it really wasn't a dive or a penalty. It is a contact sport and just because two players come together and then end up on the floor, doesn't always mean foul or dive.

 

[One Love]

Depends what you call a dive I suppose. For me a dive is when there is no contact.

Both Hammond and Lambert went down under contact. Did they make a meal of it? Perhaps, but contact still means foul.

The Fonte one was absolutely bizzarre. There was clearly contact, but was it inside the box? Not in a million years. Was it a foul? Probably not. Not a dive though either. CMS and Tarrico both went down like they had been shot, rolling around holding their legs after being fairly tackled.

I am not naive enough to say our players never do it. Every club does it these days, it is very much part of the game, but it is possible to go down, when it isn't a foul, without it being a dive as such.

If you start talking about contact being there for the second penalty when tv pictures showed there was blatantly none then the rest of your comments lose all credibility IMHO.

 

[Acker79]

Depends what you call a dive I suppose. For me a dive is when there is no contact.

Both Hammond and Lambert went down under contact. Did they make a meal of it? Perhaps, but contact still means foul.

A tactic that has been around for a while is where players throw themselves to the ground while hanging a leg out to ensure contact. Therefore, you can't really use 'contact' to determine whether a player is diving (although fifa do supposedly advise refs not to caution players for diving if there is any contact).


Hammond made the contact with harper. There was no contact with lambert that I saw in all the replays.

 

[The Large One]

Depends what you call a dive I suppose. For me a dive is when there is no contact.

Both Hammond and Lambert went down under contact. Did they make a meal of it? Perhaps, but contact still means foul.

Good grief. It seems that there are still people on this planet outside of washed-up, born-again Sky Sports presenters (the last ones left who use that gormless, meaningless phrase to dodge out of properly debating the merits of a decision) who still believe that.

I could have sworn they got eradicated. Maybe one or two slipped through.

In short, 'there was contact' does NOT necessarily mean it was a foul.

 

[gwc]

If you start talking about contact being there for the second penalty when tv pictures showed there was blatantly none then the rest of your comments lose all credibility IMHO.

A tactic that has been around for a while is where players throw themselves to the ground while hanging a leg out to ensure contact. Therefore, you can't really use 'contact' to determine whether a player is diving (although fifa do supposedly advise refs not to caution players for diving if there is any contact).


Hammond made the contact with harper. There was no contact with lambert that I saw in all the replays.

It looks like contact with Lambert to me. Not much maybe, but there doesn't have to be. Making a tackle inside the box, and making contact with the man, not the ball is a penalty surely.

It makes little difference either way. We should have had other penalties. The result would have been no different. It is a shame that Walton made this even a debate.

 

[One Love]

It looks like contact with Lambert to me. Not much maybe, but there doesn't have to be. Making a tackle inside the box, and making contact with the man, not the ball is a penalty surely.

It makes little difference either way. We should have had other penalties. The result would have been no different. It is a shame that Walton made this even a debate.

You obviously didn't watch the FL show at the weekend or your watching it through rose-tinted specs. There was NO contact for the second penalty.

Of the other 5 penalty shouts 4 were definitely not penalties. The only one that had some sort of chance was the Painter looking the wrong way one which you see on penalty boxes countless times every match which would result in every game being about 7-7.

 

[gwc]

In short, 'there was contact' does NOT necessarily mean it was a foul.

Agree, but it does mean that it wasn't a dive.

 

[gwc]

You obviously didn't watch the FL show at the weekend or your watching it through rose-tinted specs. There was NO contact for the second penalty.

Of the other 5 penalty shouts 4 were definitely not penalties. The only one that had some sort of chance was the Painter looking the wrong way one which you see on penalty boxes countless times every match which would result in every game being about 7-7.

I did, and I disagree. Only the Fonte one definitely wasn't a penalty.

The Painter one is the clearest of the lot, I think the word the commentator used was assault......

Anyway like I said I didn't come here for an argument, we will never agree on this. We deservedly won the game and that is all that matters.

 

[marshy68]

Really - not how i saw it. We created nothing albeit handled the long diagonal ball into lambert ok till he scored. Yes the penalty and the sending off effectively ruined the game - but i could only see one winner once saints scored the first goal.

Truth is they are bigger stronger and understand the way their manager wants them to play and they play to their strengths. EG Pass is it about until they get the opportunity to cross it to lambert who nods it down for bits and peices or heads it towards the goal. Saints were very effective.

My worry is we dont create anything - noone "hogs it" needs to release it earlier and look up every now and them. CMS is not being used correctly cant be long before he gets seriously pissed off - we need him running onto the ball not with his back to the goal as he is constantly being asked to do. Paynter doesnt look up to the "Glen Murray" role but i could be wrong. Vincente could be the answer if we can keep him fit...

Agree with OP was a shocker that Tanno gets himself sent off - not a great example to the rest of the team and very dissappointing as I think he is class and was MOM against Barnsley... Just one question why drop calderon and not painter am i missing something?

Sorry bit of a ramble!

 

[The Large One]

Agree, but it does mean that it wasn't a dive.

I wasn't arguing that point.

You're making the point that 'there was contact' should mean a foul. That's bollocks.

However, while we are talking about this, the point is - there is nothing Calderon did that made Lambert go over. So why did he?

 

[The Large One]

I did, and I disagree. Only the Fonte one definitely wasn't a penalty.

The Painter one is the clearest of the lot, I think the word the commentator used was assault......

The commentator was a dickhead. That fact was established a while ago.

 

[Acker79]

Agree, but it does mean that it wasn't a dive.

If contact = not a dive then the overwhelming majority of these are not dives, because there is contact in almost all of them

[yt]Ioyt2zzm530[/yt]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ioyt2zzm530

 

[gwc]

Like I said earlier, depends what you constitute a dive.

Making a meal of a tackle and dives are different to me.

 

[Onlyregisteredtogloat]

A striker like Lambert who has a sniff of a shot on goal, never goes over unless there is contact. Plus considering he's built like a brick shithouse, takes a fair amount of contact and effort to knock him over... as proven by Painter having to use his full body weight and throw himself at Lambert to take him down. Also the Brighton defender who grabbed Lambert by the shirt collar, pulling it down over his shoulder in the first half took some doing. Calderon just clipped the back of his heel, something that looks like no contact, but is enough to send anyone over.

Hammond, dive, no question.

Fonte, foul, outside the box, no question. Very funny though, still makes me chuckle.