I haven't read everything. Kenny was actually timewasting from 21 minutes, I made a point of checking the first time he looked slow.
With McCormack on such form we always had to score at least a couple. There appeared to be too big a gap between Church and the central midfield, too often there was space left empty when Church could have teed someone up. As much as Pritchard can frustrate me that's when he gets into good positions.
Sooo, the ref was inept and we had some bad luck but we have to blame ourselves at least partially. A mate said yesterday that if you keep McCormack quiet you keep Leeds quiet. We didn't do that.
Tutt tutt seems on the money once again .Does anyone know what actually can be done by a group of well organised fans to take to task a plainly incompetent and 3 points costing referee who was clearly not up to it? Moaning , with justification,about a very poor referring performance is one thing but it is not the same thing as ensuring that we do not fall foul of such nonsense again . Is it possible to petition the FA for example or exercise a veto against his appointment for any of our matches until further notice ?would that all have to be done through the club ?are there referee training courses or get togethers that could be picketed assuming one had the inclination ? A ruined weekend is soon forgotten and the risk is that unless something is done to stop the career of this guy in it's tracks then we are always at risk of again losing points if he turned up and officiated as abjectly as he did yesterday.
I can understand why he didnt give our pen, another ref would have however it was a 50-50 thing, their pen however was silly there was far to little contact for a player to go down on and besides harriott did get a bit of the ball. At the end a Leeds defender had Kermorgant in a headlock in the box but the lino didn't have the guts to give it. anywhere else on the pitch its a free kick.
Why do Charlton sell boxes to Leeds fans? East Stand was its usual peaceful self until the 4th Leeds goal goes in, the box doors fly open and some old, fat blokes start to wind Charlton fans up for a row. Once they got some they closed the doors and blinds. Stewards are useless.
Name and Shame the offenders it was The Bexley Times who did it for the Millwall game as well, they are above the law
If it wasn't the Bexley Time they might like to consider their name being associated with allowing some one to let away fans in their box again and your right the stewards do nothing unless your 8 year old has a can of coke or someone smokes.
A Leeds fan called Rigger on LUFC forum said he was in a corporate box with other Leeds customers of the official hot food
Just another thing on useless stewards why do they stand on the stairs at the end of the game in lower north blocking people leaving its bloody dangerous for one.
Charlton Athletic FC @CAFCofficial Want to have your say on yesterday's game? We'll publish the best fan blog received of 350-500 words. Send to iain.liddle@cafc.co.uk. #cafc
Skim read this thread, can't believe there are people on here saying that the Church penalty wasn't one. I was right in line with it in the North Stand and it was the most blatant penalty I have ever seen not given!!
Gonna be a tough tough season , didn't go but having seen the goals thought Jackson was as much at fault for the third goal as Hamer was with no real challenge Church done well with some luck at first to create Jackos goal
Have just watched the Man u v Arsenal Game.Perfectly respected SILENCE on remembrance sunday.Why the F*** couldnt the leeds fans understand that whilst it may be appropriate to have 2 mins applause for some well respected footballer or other it is still appropriate to have SILENCE as they did at old trafford for the war dead.
Why is Wilson getting so much stick today? wasn't his best game but he didn't hide.as for church why is he getting so much praise.absolutely shocking player.he is a centre forward and is paid to score goals.did he get paid today? hope not. Leon Clarke anyone?
Laughable comment. As if Sordell (for example) would have chased down the ball, turned two defenders inside out and squared for Jacko to tap into an empty net. Works his bollocks off and has limited ability, for sure, but "absolutely shocking"? Do me a favour.
Or fund Aguero's transfer yourself.
Laughable comment? He chased the ball down turned two players inside out and set up Jackson for a goal.Lionel messi now is he? Ross McCormack did all what you said.took players on ran his nuts off and SCORED yes SCORED four goals.easy isn't it.
Trouble is how much did McCormack cost Leeds (£2m+?) - If Church had cost that amount then I'd agree with you but it was a Free Transfer, if he was a good as McCormack he'd probably be in the Reading team still or would be with a top 6 / 8 side, certainly wouldnt be with us
Played well but we just don't score enough goals. Powell knows it, the fans know it,and I'm guessing the players know it. Always going to loose when you give away cheap goals and struggling to score. Just one of those days tbh. We've had more day under Powell being poor and winning than playing okay and losing. Move on to QPR where we can play the frustrating, negative performance which grinds outs wins for us. Come on you reds
Have just watched the Man u v Arsenal Game.Perfectly respected SILENCE on remembrance sunday.Why the F*** couldnt the leeds fans understand that whilst it may be appropriate to have 2 mins applause for some well respected footballer or other it is still appropriate to have SILENCE as they did at old trafford for the war dead.
Watched the first half of that in the pub....the whole pub (which was packed) was silent as well.
Skim read this thread, can't believe there are people on here saying that the Church penalty wasn't one. I was right in line with it in the North Stand and it was the most blatant penalty I have ever seen not given!!
I was in the Family stand (NE quadrant) and agree.
I thought we played well enough - certainly we were better than Leeds other than in the most important aspect of finishing. We lost goals at the wrong time really and the pen given against us was poor. So obvious their player was looking to go over- our pen - which wasn't given - was 70% a pen and the one the ref gave was 30%. This was a game changer in my opinion. What can you do - set up the same way as our last away game against QPR and take th epositives from the game, and there were some.
Skim read this thread, can't believe there are people on here saying that the Church penalty wasn't one. I was right in line with it in the North Stand and it was the most blatant penalty I have ever seen not given!!
I was in the Family stand (NE quadrant) and agree.
Without wishing to defend the referee, this is why it is such a difficult job. I sit near the half way line in the Upper West and to me it looked like Church had lost the ball and went down - bookable offence - Harriot clipped the player - a soft but legitimate penalty. From where I sit it looked spot on, but its all about angles of vision and all in a split second.
If he got those two decisions wrong then I don't blame him, there are enough on here that agree with what he decided, its the other decisions of the day that I found hardest to take.
K Stroud definitely effected the outcome with his determined 'not favouring the home side' policy. He knew Church was tripped because he didn't book him for simulation, there was no question the defender even vaguely touched the ball - Stroud knows the rules of the game but chose not to apply them. Early on Stephens was clattered from behind, right through him, mostly because of the wet pitch but again Stroud knows the rules and decides they don't apply and didn't book the assailant (for quibblers the ref doesn't have discretion with foul tackles from behind). Harriott was on the wrong side for the Leeds 'penalty' but he barely bumped hips with the Leeds player who is 9 inches taller and a couple of stones heavier, yet he collapsed as if cut off at the knees, there was no trip, no push i.e no foul it was a blatant dive, Stroud had a good view and again applied his version of the rules. All of that said Stroud was not the only problem: Morrison & Dervite failed to cope with McCormack at any point; Cameron Stewart's sole positive contribution was the volleyed goal aside from that he clattered the ball out of play or ran and hid; Harriott again gave us his headless chicken shoot on sight performance 1 shot on target and relentless concession of possession, maximum energy expended for no positive outcome at all; Stewart and Harriott weren't helped by Powell's insistance on playing them on the wrong wings, it hasn't worked once and he's tried it several times before, Charlton's best period and Stewart's goal came with them the right way round - no coincidence; the substitutions came too late yet again - harsh lessons resolutely unlearned.
I am absolutely amazed by the above statement of StigThundercock. There are no "rules" in football, but there are 17 "laws". This basic error erodes any sense (if indeed there is any!) that he is trying to make.
Furthermore, if a forward player "goes down" in the area and a penalty is not awarded, it doesn't follow that the player should be booked for simulation. Football is a contact sport and players can lose their footing, without a foul occurring.
I am absolutely amazed by the above statement of StigThundercock. There are no "rules" in football, but there are 17 "laws". This basic error erodes any sense (if indeed there is any!) that he is trying to make.
Furthermore, if a forward player "goes down" in the area and a penalty is not awarded, it doesn't follow that the player should be booked for simulation. Football is a contact sport and players can lose their footing, without a foul occurring.
A worthy contribution, PeterGage, about a player who "goes down" in the box not necessarily being a victim of foul play or being guilty of simulation. I recall you are a non-league assistant ref; personally, I would trust a match official - especially a pro like Keith Stroud - every time over a bunch of biased fans.
Note that Chris Powell had no complaints about the penalty conceded by Harriott. Neither did Kevin Nolan, the experienced journo and Charlton supporter, in his match report. Neither did I, sitting a few yards away in the Lower North.
I didn't have a clear view of Church's claim for a pen. I agree with StigThundercock's brief summary: we lost because of our typically wayward finishing and our unusually fragile defence.
Skim read this thread, can't believe there are people on here saying that the Church penalty wasn't one. I was right in line with it in the North Stand and it was the most blatant penalty I have ever seen not given!!
I was in the Family stand (NE quadrant) and agree.
Without wishing to defend the referee, this is why it is such a difficult job. I sit near the half way line in the Upper West and to me it looked like Church had lost the ball and went down - bookable offence - Harriot clipped the player - a soft but legitimate penalty. From where I sit it looked spot on, but its all about angles of vision and all in a split second.
I also sit near the half way line in the Upper West and this was exactly my perspective too. I'd add that I think the referee was trying to make allowance for the conditions and that's why he didn't book Church - I felt he tumbled/slipped rather than dived.
Their penalty was a soft one, but I feared the worst even before the Leeds player went down. Harriott was the wrong side of his opponent and to have any hope of blocking the shot/cross needed to move to the right. He was asking for trouble trying to attack the ball from behind/to the left. I like Harriott, but his decision making is very poor at times and this was another example.
All that having been said, I agree entirely that it's all about angles and I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Indeed, it's a shame that we never seem to get a definitive post mortem on controversial incidents such as these. I think it would be healthy if we did and wouldn't be hard to organise. We might even find that referees are right more often than we imagine.
Comments
With McCormack on such form we always had to score at least a couple. There appeared to be too big a gap between Church and the central midfield, too often there was space left empty when Church could have teed someone up. As much as Pritchard can frustrate me that's when he gets into good positions.
Sooo, the ref was inept and we had some bad luck but we have to blame ourselves at least partially. A mate said yesterday that if you keep McCormack quiet you keep Leeds quiet. We didn't do that.
MATCH STATS
Possesion
36% - Leeds
Charlton Athletic - 64%
Shots
Charlton - 17
Leeds - 9
On target
Charlton - 4
Leeds - 4
Corners
Charlton - 6
Leeds - 1
suppliers at the Valley.
Want to have your say on yesterday's game? We'll publish the best fan blog received of 350-500 words. Send to iain.liddle@cafc.co.uk. #cafc
Church done well with some luck at first to create Jackos goal
0% top half ............ 75% 13th- 21st ......... 25% Bottom 3
Michael Brown smiling as he walked towards the east stand after faking an injury is probably in my top 5 most horrible football moments.
Just one of those days tbh. We've had more day under Powell being poor and winning than playing okay and losing.
Move on to QPR where we can play the frustrating, negative performance which grinds outs wins for us.
Come on you reds
If he got those two decisions wrong then I don't blame him, there are enough on here that agree with what he decided, its the other decisions of the day that I found hardest to take.
All of that said Stroud was not the only problem: Morrison & Dervite failed to cope with McCormack at any point; Cameron Stewart's sole positive contribution was the volleyed goal aside from that he clattered the ball out of play or ran and hid; Harriott again gave us his headless chicken shoot on sight performance 1 shot on target and relentless concession of possession, maximum energy expended for no positive outcome at all; Stewart and Harriott weren't helped by Powell's insistance on playing them on the wrong wings, it hasn't worked once and he's tried it several times before, Charlton's best period and Stewart's goal came with them the right way round - no coincidence; the substitutions came too late yet again - harsh lessons resolutely unlearned.
Furthermore, if a forward player "goes down" in the area and a penalty is not awarded, it doesn't follow that the player should be booked for simulation. Football is a contact sport and players can lose their footing, without a foul occurring.
Note that Chris Powell had no complaints about the penalty conceded by Harriott. Neither did Kevin Nolan, the experienced journo and Charlton supporter, in his match report. Neither did I, sitting a few yards away in the Lower North.
I didn't have a clear view of Church's claim for a pen. I agree with StigThundercock's brief summary: we lost because of our typically wayward finishing and our unusually fragile defence.
Their penalty was a soft one, but I feared the worst even before the Leeds player went down. Harriott was the wrong side of his opponent and to have any hope of blocking the shot/cross needed to move to the right. He was asking for trouble trying to attack the ball from behind/to the left. I like Harriott, but his decision making is very poor at times and this was another example.
All that having been said, I agree entirely that it's all about angles and I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Indeed, it's a shame that we never seem to get a definitive post mortem on controversial incidents such as these. I think it would be healthy if we did and wouldn't be hard to organise. We might even find that referees are right more often than we imagine.