Watford (H) - Sat 2nd Apr 2022 (12:30pm)

[Wezza]

14 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

"Having been deified people have then started to crucify me"

 

There's literally an owl quote for every occasion.

 

He was only here for six months or so, amazing.

Six months is a long time in bird years (it certainly felt like it)

[Bruce Spanner]

5 minutes ago, Harry's Lad said:

The fact he was here at all is the amazing thing. 

 

Hate is a strong word but I do actually hate the snide old cunt.

 

"I can't work harder and I can't work better"

 

He tried!

 

I might only ever engage with the FF through Hodgeson quotes from now on, it's a veritable gold mine of utter mediocrity.

[Bruce Spanner]

2 minutes ago, Wezza said:

Six months is a long time in bird years (it certainly felt like it)

 

“There will always be a certain number of people who wanted a different manager”

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Dean Ashton pretending that fouls like the one on Jota happen every game (they don't) and that would mean it shouldn't be a penalty (it wouldn't).

 

Almost as mad as the Owl bitching that it shouldn't be a penalty because Jota didn't appeal and that VAR isn't there to pick up things the referee didn't see.

https://talksport.com/football/1078014/liverpool-penalty-dean-ashton-watford-roy-hodgson-rugby-tackle-diogo-jota/?utm_campaign=talksportfacebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1648914461

 

[Grinch]

Every game feels like a cup final.  It was bitty but we need more than enough to win.  Jota coulda had a few.  Not the worst performance considering our Africans were fucked.

 

 

[sh#t waffle]

11 hours ago, gkmacca said:

He's probably thinking about Hublot watches. He's obsessed with them. His whole family is obsessed with them. It helps that they pay him for 'accidentally' displaying them on camera alll the time!

 

 

 

I know when I'm about to drop £20k on a new watch I check to see what Roy Hodgson's son is wearing before making my decision.

[mike23]

The Athletic feeling the need to write a whole article about the penalty incident from yesterday. I can't say I recall them doing the same when City were gifted wins against Wolves and Everton by decisions that were far more controversial and actually much more pivotal to the result. A bit like when we got a late penalty at Palace you'd think it had led to a late winner rather than simply wrapping up a game we were already winning. Sure, Watford could have theoretically equalized had it still been 1-0, but considering there were only a couple of minutes left and they'd barely crossed the halfway line in the past half hour it seems pretty unlikely.

 

Most importantly, though, it was a clear penalty as rugby tackling in the penalty area is considered a foul by anyone with any sense. Just because refs have for some reason let defenders get away with it a lot in the past seems to have created this weird view that it should be allowed. 

 

The amount of moaning from Hodgson has helped to create the narrative. Just another shit manager who will always look for any opportunity to use the officials as scapegoats for games they deserve to lose. They're in the bottom 3 with games rapidly running out, have played more games than most of the teams above them, yet he was happy enough to just take a narrow defeat yesterday despite having had 3 weeks to plan for the game. You'd think in that time a team could come up with a more creative plan than stick everyone behind the ball and hope to nick something at the end when the winning team gets a bit nervy, yet somehow this was viewed as a tactical masterclass from the BT commentators. 

[Scooby Dudek]

So if someone punches someone off the ball and no one sees it, then absolutely nothing should be done retrospectively because no one saw it originally and no one appealed ? 

The entire point if VAR is to pick up on incidents missed by the on field officials. 

 

It is not cricket, you do not need to appeal for a decision to be given, it is completely irrelevant.

[Jimmy Hills Chin]

25 minutes ago, Scooby Dudek said:

So if someone punches someone off the ball and no one sees it, then absolutely nothing should be done retrospectively because no one saw it originally and no one appealed ? 

The entire point if VAR is to pick up on incidents missed by the on field officials. 

 

It is not cricket, you do not need to appeal for a decision to be given, it is completely irrelevant.

Unless you're a cunt of a manager or a b-movie footballer apparently

[TheSire]

33 minutes ago, mike23 said:

The Athletic feeling the need to write a whole article about the penalty incident from yesterday. I can't say I recall them doing the same when City were gifted wins against Wolves and Everton by decisions that were far more controversial and actually much more pivotal to the result. A bit like when we got a late penalty at Palace you'd think it had led to a late winner rather than simply wrapping up a game we were already winning. Sure, Watford could have theoretically equalized had it still been 1-0, but considering there were only a couple of minutes left and they'd barely crossed the halfway line in the past half hour it seems pretty unlikely.

 

Most importantly, though, it was a clear penalty as rugby tackling in the penalty area is considered a foul by anyone with any sense. Just because refs have for some reason let defenders get away with it a lot in the past seems to have created this weird view that it should be allowed. 

 

The amount of moaning from Hodgson has helped to create the narrative. Just another shit manager who will always look for any opportunity to use the officials as scapegoats for games they deserve to lose. They're in the bottom 3 with games rapidly running out, have played more games than most of the teams above them, yet he was happy enough to just take a narrow defeat yesterday despite having had 3 weeks to plan for the game. You'd think in that time a team could come up with a more creative plan than stick everyone behind the ball and hope to nick something at the end when the winning team gets a bit nervy, yet somehow this was viewed as a tactical masterclass from the BT commentators. 

Luckily 99% of the comments are common sense so the athletic have made themselves look like thick cunts for 'writing' that article.

[an tha]

Roy Hodgson is a cunt.

[Bruce Spanner]

8 minutes ago, an tha said:

Roy Hodgson is a cunt.

 

"He's not performed -- very often at least -- to the level I'd expect of him"

[Caramac]

@AngryOfTuebrook

 

Had a few problems recording the game yesterday, seems like they added more copyright protection in the latest browser updates. Caught me unawares yesterday.

Here's a few gifs I just put together from motd.

 

 

 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, mike23 said:

The Athletic feeling the need to write a whole article about the penalty incident from yesterday. I can't say I recall them doing the same when City were gifted wins against Wolves and Everton by decisions that were far more controversial and actually much more pivotal to the result. A bit like when we got a late penalty at Palace you'd think it had led to a late winner rather than simply wrapping up a game we were already winning. Sure, Watford could have theoretically equalized had it still been 1-0, but considering there were only a couple of minutes left and they'd barely crossed the halfway line in the past half hour it seems pretty unlikely.

 

Most importantly, though, it was a clear penalty as rugby tackling in the penalty area is considered a foul by anyone with any sense. Just because refs have for some reason let defenders get away with it a lot in the past seems to have created this weird view that it should be allowed. 

 

The amount of moaning from Hodgson has helped to create the narrative. Just another shit manager who will always look for any opportunity to use the officials as scapegoats for games they deserve to lose. They're in the bottom 3 with games rapidly running out, have played more games than most of the teams above them, yet he was happy enough to just take a narrow defeat yesterday despite having had 3 weeks to plan for the game. You'd think in that time a team could come up with a more creative plan than stick everyone behind the ball and hope to nick something at the end when the winning team gets a bit nervy, yet somehow this was viewed as a tactical masterclass from the BT commentators. 

How did they get a whole article out of it? I got two short sentences.

It was a foul. It was in the penalty box. 

There's really nothing else to say.

[A_S]

That such an incident being given a penalty is in any way controversial says far more about the standard of refereeing and less about the beneficiary. 

[A_S]

1 minute ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

How did they get a whole article out of it? I got two short sentences.

It was a foul. It was in the penalty box. 

There's really nothing else to say.

New set of six?

[manwiththestick]

3 hours ago, Anubis said:

Ah, the hierarchy of PL conspiracy theories.

 

hornetboy1First Team

wfcSinatra said: ↑

Having seen the penalty again on MOTD I have to say that is absolutely laughable, nobody bats an eyelid! Almost feels like someone said “we need to secure this win for Liverpool”. Proper joke.

Well yes, this is exactly how it works. We’d have probably lost anyway, so today it didn’t cost us in all reality. My big concern is when we play EPL darlings Leeds and Everton. We can play well, deserve the win but it’s taken away because the EPL want their bigger clubs to remain in the league. It’s good for their brand to have Leeds and Everton part of it. It’s not good having clubs like Watford or Burnley. We bring nothing to the party. Unfortunately that’s the way it is.

If you don't want to run the risk of giving away a penalty for a defender rugby tacking a forward in the penalty box, don't have your players rugby tacking the opposition players in the penalty box.

[mike23]

26 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

How did they get a whole article out of it? I got two short sentences.

It was a foul. It was in the penalty box. 

There's really nothing else to say.

The article actually attempts to make out that Jota commits the initial foul. There's some questioning of why this was given when similar incidents are often ignored - still not really sure why this is considered a suitable argument for not giving the penalty anyway - and they pad the whole thing out with a lot of Hodgson quotes. The Athletic have some good articles sometimes and at one point seemed a refreshing contrast to the general clickbait nonsense that seems to largely pass for sports journalism these days, but they seem to have been filling their site with more and more pointless dross recently.

[gkmacca]

38 minutes ago, A_S said:

That such an incident being given a penalty is in any way controversial says far more about the standard of refereeing and less about the beneficiary. 

As I said yesterday, it's PRECISELY the kind of incident for which VAR was designed originally to intervene. THAT should be the story now. After more than a year of the most witless messing around with slo-mo and lines across the screen, and pondering how many angels are dancing on the head of a pin, VAR actually responded to a clear and obvious error. And in spite of the fact that most of the media have complained about the use of VAR over this period, they now seem too confused to go back and check on what it is there to do.

[dockers_strike]

8 minutes ago, gkmacca said:

As I said yesterday, it's PRECISELY the kind of incident for which VAR was designed originally to intervene. THAT should be the story now. After more than a year of the most witless messing around with slo-mo and lines across the screen, and pondering how many angels are dancing on the head of a pin, VAR actually responded to a clear and obvious error. And in spite of the fact that most of the media have complained about the use of VAR over this period, they now seem too confused to go back and check on what it is there to do.

Yeah, exactly this. Im down the other end of the SKD Upper and didnt see Jota being hauled down in the incident. But it is exactly as you say, VAR is supposed to spot the things the ref and linos miss. What planet is hodgson on, never mind shite fans by thinking VAR should only be used for incidents the ref DOES see?

 

And it's funny they all supported the VAR decision the ref didnt spot where van Dijk supposedly blocked Reece James on Matip's goal against chelsea in the final.

 

The ref on the pitch didnt see that yet it's OK for VAR to be used to scrub that goal out? Hypocritical gobshites.

[Chip Butty]

Fair fucks to Watford, they made it difficult for us, we didn't help ourselves at times and their set up of two tight banks of 4 and playing quick on the break, whilst an obvious tactic, they did really play it well.

Ourselves on the other hand looked rusty, some poor first touches and wayward passing was in part due to how Watford closed us down, but in the main, we looked off it. There will be significant improvement on this for Tuesday no doubt and obviously nest week. A wins a win, they say and so it seems. We move on. 

[manwiththestick]

The thing is, stuff like the wrestling of Jota to the ground, you will see at least one example most weeks in the PL that goes unpunished.

 

If this is now a new precedent going forward I'm all for it but wouldn't surprise me if it happens in another game and it doesn't get reviewed.

[sir roger]

3 hours ago, Bruce Spanner said:

 

"I can't work harder and I can't work better"

 

He tried!

 

I might only ever engage with the FF through Hodgeson quotes from now on, it's a veritable gold mine of utter mediocrity.

We enjoyed the day at Alder Hey which is arguably the second best childrens hospital in the country.

[Bob]

1 hour ago, Caramac said:

@AngryOfTuebrook

 

Had a few problems recording the game yesterday, seems like they added more copyright protection in the latest browser updates. Caught me unawares yesterday.

Here's a few gifs I just put together from motd.

 

 

 

Are you able to make a super slow mo version of this zoomed in on Fab? I’m watching it over and over trying to work out what the fuck happens with his legs?

[Bruce Spanner]

3 minutes ago, sir roger said:

We enjoyed the day at Alder Hey which is arguably the second best childrens hospital in the country.

 

“Sir Alex is entitled to any opinion he wants to have”