In the last 15 minutes at Burnley we dominated the game for the first time with only 10 men by pushing up field and getting players into their box. Same thing happened today but only after they scored the go ahead goal. Time and again this season Bruces tactics have been to pull everyone back when we've got a lead in the last 15-20 minutes and as a result we've given up at least 7 points to late goals in the last few minutes. Isn't it about time he realized that and changed tactics so we keep putting pressure on rather than becoming overly defensive. Even as early as Livermores goal today we seemed to be dropping back and letting them dominate possession. Watching Palace and QPR for example they keep attacking to the end. We have better players than these teams. I'd like to see us be more attack minded.
Hull City V Spurs Match Thread
- Thread starter Chazz Rheinhold
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
And what was with people leaving early when it was still 1-1. Honestly can't fathom why you would do that.
Plus I'm getting sick and tired of people going early in the first half so they can beat the queues for a pint and then coming back late after the second half has kicked off so they can finish supping their precious pints.
Are you out for a few beers or to watch a game of football. Because you can go for a beer any time. They even have special public houses just for that purpose.
Plus I'm getting sick and tired of people going early in the first half so they can beat the queues for a pint and then coming back late after the second half has kicked off so they can finish supping their precious pints.
Are you out for a few beers or to watch a game of football. Because you can go for a beer any time. They even have special public houses just for that purpose.
Ball boys didn't look interested again today. They were late back to their positions in the second half too strolling back to continue their conversations. Sitting them in pairs seems counter productive in tbem being alert and ready to return the ball.
baffles me too. and all these who need a meal. would they die without alcohol and food for more than two hours?
ultimately Brucies substitutions lost us the game - bringing Meyler on was ****ing stupid - not bringing Chester on was ****ing stupid - Meyler was absolutely useless - too slow, kept losing the ball and giving it to the opposition - a sort of Alex Bruce type of performance
When Yid said that Livermore should of seen red, wasn't he already booked and then tried to snap from behind Mason with no hope of getting the ball?
Must admit I thought it warranted a booking at the very least
Must admit I thought it warranted a booking at the very least
I have to agree, Meyler was very slow and got caught in possession on a number of occasions, Chester certainly would have been a better option.
A good match for 50 mins ruined by awful match officals. Not just the sending off they got wrong either.
That's not what I said at all. Go back and read it again.
I don't think it's uncommon for an official to give themselves a couple of seconds of thinking time, especially since linesmen are generally only going to be giving throw ins and offsides in most matches and Ramirez getting in Jan's face straight after probably didn't help his case.
The officals were terrible though and as you say there was dissent on both sides, I guess it just comes down to what was said and how. If everytime you shouted at a referee you got booked we'd have both had a handful of bookings in the first half alone but that was down to the ref, he should've stopped the game called both captains over and told them to shut their players up, the longer the ref lets it go, the more chance of the game boiling over. I hate all this surrounding the ref running at them to complain about everything but they were getting so many decisions wrong yesterday I do think it was understandable. From a Spurs fan's point of view it was probably the only positive to come out of the first half, we were playing badly but at least the players were showing some fight and that they cared.
Looking at some of the negativity of comments on here, particularly towards Ramirez, has made me wonder if some of the plonkers saw the game or know anything about football, and certainly made me not bother to read much of the dross.
for once i did manage to see the game, albeit on the box rather than a bad stream! Was a little surprised at the line-up but understandable given no Mo and Bruce's desire to make changes from Burnley. But it worked and had Spurs stretched and not coping with city's attacking width - exactly what was needed against Spurs weak, makeshift defence. Personally I would have preferred Rosenior and Elmo on the right rather than Ben Arfa. Ben Arfa was the only one I found disappointing, even without his glaring miss, but the rest raised their game and played so well, that may be a little harsh.
What has really p****d me off about the result, and the subsequent reporting, as that few have really picked up on the part played by the appalling ref, not including the red card incident. Throughout the first half even the least biased would have to admit that City were getting very little from the ref who seemed to be favouring Spurs. The most biased would have suggested he had money on them! Hence the red card. How many times did niggling fouls, on Ramirez in particular, go unpunished with nothing given at all. The worst, most serious, and most blatant - right in front of the ref, was when Eriksen (MOM, responsible for both Spurs goals) went through on Ramirez's ankle with studs up, left Ramirez on the floor. The ref didn't even stop the game for a foul and it took a Spurs player to waft the ball into touch before the ref even noticed Ramirez had not got up! The foul was certainly worthy of a yellow, and some refs would have given a straight red, but not even a foul! No wonder he was frustrated - a frustration caused by the ref! Even when Ramirez - stupidly for sure - flicked out with his foot, he'd just been sandwiched between 2 Spurs players, fouled, left on the floor and nothing given!
One can only hope the referee assessor noticed how poor the ref was and he gets demoted from the PL - though there's the injustice - we won't get the points back! A faint hope perhaps as few others seem to have commented on this (apologies to those on here who may have but as I said, couldn't be bothered to trawl through posts having seen so much negativity).
For me, they all played bloody well, including Ramirez, and it was a hell of a game despite the sending off. Every reason to remain optimistic!!!!!
On a lighter note, did anyone else see Quinny boot the ball at Brady's head while he was down injured.
Bit harsh I thought
https://vine.co/v/O1AdQUth7eM
Behave! The ball was there to be won, Eriksen got a toe on it and because Eriksen gets there first Gaston kicked the underside of Eriksen's boot. To be honest, I wouldn't have been surprised if a foul had been given your way but you're making it sound like there was intent and real damage done, when there wasn't. Ramirez lay on the floor for awhile and was back on his feet itching to get going a again a few moments after the ball was kicked out. Funny the timing of that recovery, eh?
The ref saw Eriksen get the ball, decided it wasn't a foul and as it's not a head injury or a leg breaker he shouldn't stop play. That's not always what happens, unfortunately, as refs frequesntly stop the game when it's not a head injury or an especially bad injury and if they don't the opposition will often kick it out. Just another inconsistency between what refs do and what they're supposed to do.
You guys were lucky not to see 2 more straight reds, Livermore scythed down Mason well after the ball had gone, going straight through him and Huddlestone brutally kicked a player who was going up for a header. See, it's easy to make every foul sound like a vicious challenge if you get creative with the description. Actually, why stop there, Vertonghen punted Ramirez up the arse and Ramirez punched Vertonghen before hacking him down. It's a wonder the game didn't get called off with such brutality
On a lighter note, did anyone else see Quinny boot the ball at Brady's head while he was down injured.
Bit harsh I thought
Best bit was Roseniors reaction, he clearly found it hilarious!
Wonder why old Bill went in e2, or was it the edge of e3 and lobbed out some spurs fans ...were they fighting amongst themselves ?
Behave! The ball was there to be won, Eriksen got a toe on it and because Eriksen gets there first Gaston kicked the underside of Eriksen's boot. To be honest, I wouldn't have been surprised if a foul had been given your way but you're making it sound like there was intent and real damage done, when there wasn't. Ramirez lay on the floor for awhile and was back on his feet itching to get going a again a few moments after the ball was kicked out. Funny the timing of that recovery, eh?
The ref saw Eriksen get the ball, decided it wasn't a foul and as it's not a head injury or a leg breaker he shouldn't stop play. That's not always what happens, unfortunately, as refs frequesntly stop the game when it's not a head injury or an especially bad injury and if they don't the opposition will often kick it out. Just another inconsistency between what refs do and what they're supposed to do.
You guys were lucky not to see 2 more straight reds, Livermore scythed down Mason well after the ball had gone, going straight through him and Huddlestone brutally kicked a player who was going up for a header. See, it's easy to make every foul sound like a vicious challenge if you get creative with the description. Actually, why stop there, Vertonghen punted Ramirez up the arse and Ramirez punched Vertonghen before hacking him down. It's a wonder the game didn't get called off with such brutality
I actually agree that Livermore was lucky not to get a yellow for that. However I think his challenge came out of frustration of the ref's decisions who more or less lost control. What disappointed me was that the Ramirez sending off ruined the game as up till then it have been a good game to watch.
I was just exaggerating a point.
I like Livermore and have never seen him go out to hurt someone. I think he was just cynically taking Mason out and didn't mean to clatter him as badly as he did. I guess this is where 2 sides differ, you say Livermore's frustrated with the ref, I'd say the ref bottled the decision because the crowd had been on his back ever since the red, booing every decision that went against Hull(as is any fan's right). It's all opinions but these forums we'd be pretty dull without them.