We had quite a bit of the ball, and for a stretch surrounding halftime we had pretty much all of the ball. Unfortunately, a large portion of that possession was in our own half, and most of the shots were from distance; the penalty appeal aside, we really only had a couple good opportunities. Part of that was Norwich, part was a worrying lack of initiative when we had the ball.
Seen MOTD highlights. Great save from Johnson. No-one seems to have mentioned the turn and shot from Dani... that looked very sharp. That was a near bit of skill and would like to see more of that; the goals will then come.
On the subject of penalties in general, IMO far too many are awarded nowadays. Saturday was an even match of a quite unexceptional kind, a bread and butter match in every respect, yet Howard Webb is being slated for not giving TWO penalties. I haven't the stats to hand, but I bet people would be staggered by the difference between how many penalties were awarded on average in a season in the pre-Premier League days compared with nowadays. And it is not down to the speed of the game, or the greater skill of the players or anything like that. It's down to rule changes, guidance on the interpretation of rules and FIFA/UEFA policies. Despite which IMO Howard Webb was actually correct in both his decisions: Johnson's hand ball was a reflex protecting of his face from a fierce drive, and Fonte just held Snodgrass off the ball through sheer strength and determination as he is entitled to do when within playing distance of the ball. Neither would have been looked at twice for a penalty in the (good) old days before all the tinkering with rules and interpretation.
Yes, I saw that. The keeper saved it, but impressive to get the shot away when turning whilst marked very closely.
As regards the penalty claims I see it like this.Our claim for handball :No,Your claim for handball : Dubious,hit hard and although the players hands were up had they not been the ball would have ended up halfway up the stand.Foul on Snodgrass:Looked the most likely 50/50. Overall I would say that a draw would not have been unfair to either side. Just balanced out our misfortune at Hull the week before where it was a less likely penalty than either of those two. IMO about 75% of handball pens should not be given.
I haven't had a problem with the refereeing at all this season. It has been substandard but not in a way that has significantly disadvantaged us. We gave away far too many free kicks on Saturday which could be avoided by better tackling technique. I would have been gutted if Rickie's clearly onside shot had have been disallowed and we might have scored from the rebound anyway but that was the only glaring error from the last 3 games for mine. Everyone was complaining about Gaston not getting a free against Sunderland but I didn't think the defender moved enough to warrant a free.
Just caught up on this thread. I find that, if fans can be put on a 'spectrum' of sorts, the antithesis of a 'pant wetter' would be a 'happy clapper'. Some would say there is a roughly equal number of both on the Norwich board.
Sorry mate, that's seen through yellow lenses. It should have been a penalty. As Michael Owen said, if that wasnt a penalty then only 1% should be given. for the record i thought Fonte made a fair challenge on Snodgrass too .... if ed been playing Rugby league It was more disappointing that we didn't play well.
This will sound rude, but I think this is garbage. Outside of the box, both incidents would have seen free kicks.
The johnson 'save' was a defo pen. What happened after that is irrelevant because if we'd gone 1 up it would be different, so NO things weren't evened up in the game. Sick of hearing that.
I would have given it a penalty but i can understand why it wasn't given. Chambers one looked like hand to ball whereas Johnson clearly wasn't looking and had his hands in the wrong place although perhaps he is entitled to protect his face (which he wasn't quite doing his hands were quite loose it must be said).
