Legod Third Coming

This is what I admire most about what NA has achieved. We have players who are confident on the ball. Genuinely, this is the secret of the success of BARCA and all other world-class teams. The ball is to be loved and caressed like a young mistress you cannot wait to see again, not belted around like an old wife you can't wait to see the back off...

To answer this and the point above, surely there is a halfway house? Let's take the case of Derbyshire's dive... Let's say a penalty was given. There is now going to be a stoppage. So how much time extra (if any) does it take for a fourth official to review this? You say Tennis and Crickets have numerous stoppages but the referral system in both simply uses stoppages that already existed (as they do in football) to analyse the decision an ensure it is the right one. Football has countless stoppages for free-kicks, fouls, penalties, corners, throw-ins. To allow a team to refer a decision would add precious little additional time. After all, it's hardly likely someone is going to appeal an off-side if they are, say, given three appeals per game? And while Kraken might think a batsman edging and not walking is cheating, what if he edges it into his pads and is given LBW, should he stand his ground and refuse to accept the decision?? The choice for me is twofold: 1) The referee's decision stands come what may and all live by it (which wouldn't preclude people from trying to con the ref) 2) Some form of better analysis (video or additional refereeing) is required to improve the decision making. Video replays are nigh-on instant - there seems to be some misconception that Sky have not analysed every corner before it's actually taken!! Or they are restricted to key decisions - free-kicks within 30 yards of goal, for example.

It's a bit far fetched to imagine that the players had an issue with Pardew after our most successful season in 30 odd years isn't it? And after a 4-0 thumping... The Chairman had an issue with Pardew certainly. The players were more likely in complete shock - and Wilkins was not the man to reinstall the rudder by any stretch (I have sympathy with him)! What I would say is that last season Rickie Lambert was half the player he is again this season and I put that down to the superb pre-season Adkins must have done on his diet and fitness. To me Rickie looks half a stone lighter, tighter and sharper. So while last year I wasn't convinced Pardew wasted pre-season, this year I am!!!!

The better comparison is surely cricket? Here, the line between sportsmanship, cheating and simple deception are much greyer than golf and snooker which have obvious fouls and sports with less room for doubt. If a batsman knowingly edges but does not walk, is that cheating? Likewise, if a player feels contact and goes down knowing the rules, is that cheating? What about the following week when he is felled but unseen and no penalty is given? I think it's very easy to suggest that players dive or attempt to con the ref, but then when referees so often miss blatant fouls what are they supposed to do? What is the difference between a genuine and ungenuine trailing leg?? If you ask all the players to be honest but then the officials compound this by making honest mistakes, there are bound to be grey areas forever and a day. The simplest solution is to do what cricket and rugby have done and introduce video technology which can at least legislate for the most obvious erroneous decisions. The ability to replay an incident might also stop some players from attempting simulation...

Not really, we were 14th on 4 points after three games (6 points off second with a game in hand). We were 22nd on 4 points after 6 games. Truth is we won 4-0 before Wilkins stepped in and then lost four straight games...

First, I am 100% behind Nigel, I love watching us play. I am delighted he was appointed (although the timing probably cost us the title and me personally over two grand...)!! However, we were winning 53% of our games before he arrived. He jumped in the bus and hit the accelerator. To be fair to the previous incumbent, he turned the bus around and pointed it in the right direction...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulfletcher/2011/09/the_adkins_diet_gets_saints_in.html#297164

I would say on the first half performance we did deserve it, but I was shocked at our start to the second half. I expected us to come out and be a hell of a lot tighter. Instead we came our and rode our luck like a Texan cowboy for ten minutes before getting a foothold back in the game. Thankfully SKD pulled off a wonder save during this period from their sloppily given away free kick. If that had gone in, it might have been a different story. The positives are that the back four was makeshift and that our ball control is at times really Barca-esque.

The barriers are at the insistence of the Old Bill - landlord has been told he has to 'control his outside area'... I normally support the police but here is a classic example of poor policy. The correct policy is to allow fans of both teams, including families, to mingle in a convivial atmosphere and to station 1 or 2 coppers in the pub, getting known by the locals who then start to take ownership of their relationship with the Old Bill... The fans will then effectively police themselves and anyone who wants to start trouble in that sort of pub will be discouraged from doing so. But what do I know...

Indeed, easy to blame Cork for allowing the ball in, but in reality a bloke was allowed to amble into our box, pitch a tent, fill his billy can with beans, brew a cuppa, read the Sporting Life and then tap the ball in. Where our other defenders were at this time has been handed over to Poirot to investigate...

Sensible analysis. A makshift back four were undone by a lack of understanding and, to be fair, some bloody good accurate passing from the opposition (contrary to what some on here believe, there is no law in football preventing the opposition from also playing well, whoever they are). Cork was left without cover and Fox was too intent on going forward rather than doing his job. But you cannot fault the effort or industriousness of our team Better, you cannot fault our confidence ON THE BALL. Many teams on finding themselves 1-0 up with five minutes of injury time would not have the composure or intelligence to do what we did. We kept hold of the ball superbly - every play from back to front - and that is the mark of a good team in the making.

Our whole defence looked suspect. Easy to blame Cork but he had less cover than Pamela Anderson on Baywatch! A team should defend from the front and we didn't. Guly is a lovely languid player with a super touch, but I worked harder than him trying to get the last remnants of the bottle of mustard on my hot dog. And towards the end no-one could get into the box when we attacked, so bringing on De Ridder was the right call. We looked a bit tired. For my money, we need to tighten up that back five - still not enough chat from Kelvin - but better still KEEP ATTACKING. I don't give a monkey's if we conceded two goals a game, so long as we score five. And we can because our passing and movement in the final third is simply breathtaking at times. So feck it, let's play like Brazil of the 70s. You can score if you can get the ball off us. But chances are we'll be three up then...

Yeah, he could sell programmes.

Which by January we might be as good as

The reason is at the top of this thread. Your concept is a touch less credible I'm afraid...

You seriously believe the police would risk a family being caught up and potentially seriously injured? They would enjoy going around and giving the news to Mrs Brown that her husband and son/daughter are in intensive care? That works better for them than sitting down with the Commissioner and pointing out that the effectiveness of their efforts in keeping public order?

I would have them do something else. I would have them sterilising the chav scum who think that it's their right to have a punch up with whoever they see fit. In the old days they would go and meet up somewhere. These days even the scum have no class.

Yep, that's it. The police are intent on allowing trouble to happen so they can stay in jobs. Perhaps the police created terrorist attrocities too so that they could create SO19... Here's a question. Do you think the police encouraged the club to serve additional beer to make sure the Millwall fans were all primed for a good punch up?

Sure, they shot a bloke in the head - a series of mistakes made at the highest level. Do you think they intended to shoot an innocent man? I'm not saying the police are either above the law or beyond reproach. They also can't admit the mistakes they make or they get sued by all and sundry - money that you and I pay... Listen to what you're saying. All the police are only interested in keeping themselves in jobs which they deliberately feck up?? If they got this wrong - and by the way, you have no idea what alternative outcomes they might have avoided - they got it wrong. Next time, when they keep a load of fans in, they kick off and beat one of our stewards up, remember that they got it right.

I wasn't having a go per se - apologies. But if people want to take issue with what happened, why the hell aren't they on here complaining about the idiots who create this trouble rather than the police who have to pick up the pieces and will get slaughtered either way for any of their actions? Although the police are trained, a crowd is not something that can be managed like a herd of cattle. Sadly, a crowd can react in any one of thousands of ways each time. The management of crowds is a science that's evolving all the time. So what are the polcie supposed to do? You say they're trained therefore mistakes shouldn't happen. Has no pilot ever crashed a plane? Has no goalkpeer ever dropped the ball? They're still trained aren't they? That's what I mean - are you expecting the police to get it right every time?? Even though crowds can react in different ways on different days with exactly the same management and provocation or otherwise?? It seems bizarre to me though that anyone would say - there was trouble, the police are in any way to blame. If I drove at 120mph and slewed off the road on my way home tonight, are BMW somehow to blame? Or McAlpine?

This approach is bizarre. The police cannot make a genuine mistake but anyone else in their walk of life can? Tell me this, do you think the police set out to ensure there is trouble and create mountains of work for themselves, their colleagues, the courts (knowing that most troublemakers will be given a slapped wrist) and the remainder of the public going about their business? Is what you are saying that the police are just incompetent? Or might you not respect that they are on the whole: 1. Underpaid - would you take on some feckwit with a knife for £20k a year? 2. Under-resourced 3. Under pressure to conform to shifting standards. Kettle a crowd and you're abused. Try to police a crowd on the basis they are decent human beings on the whole and you're abused. They can't win. Why not rather than having a go at them, have a go at the sort of scum who pervade our society who think kicking off over an argument on the internet or stabbing someone because they're wearing the wrong colour shirt is somehow justifiable? I bet the bloke who responded to this has been beaten up, had himself and family threatened, been asked to accept a 1% pay increase (so a decrease ion real terms of 4%) and has probably never been thanked by anybody oustide of his own department for the hundreds of matches that pass off without trouble every year... If he fecked this one up, I'm sure they'll learn for the future. If not they genuinely are incompetent.

Not helped by the fact that people expect higher standards of perfection from the police than would be the case in their own lives. It cannot benefit the police to have trouble at a football match. For one thing, it is simply work that they could well do without. So you have to assume they do their best. Will it always be right? Sure, if hindsight spectacales were freely available on the NHS. Shame more people don't have respect for the job they do and the fact the police exist to uphold the law for the benefit of society - not themselves.

One of your rare posts I agree with.

What this really says is as follows: "Years of liberal political correctness has denied us (the Old Bill) the right to treat people how they should be treated based on how they behave. Years ago we could have treated football fans from Millwall based on their reputation. Today, it would infringe their human rights. Do not blame us, blame a lack of positive male role models and countless faceless beaurocrats in Brussels.." And do you know what I agree. I have never veen involved in football violence. I deplore the holdback. But whever I have had it applied, I abide by it peacefully recognising it is a small price to pay for my safety and security.

Really? I thought it was widely known that they had a £10k a week limit in the Premiership? If that is true, they can't be on more now and I imagine we have players on well above 10K...