Obviously a bad result and a game that threw up many talking points. Firstly, I'm not too sure about their penalty and I've seen replays where it looks like he dives and seen ones where it looks like Andy nicks his foot. But what I would say is that the referee you can see that at the point of supposed impact, he's stretching his neck and trying to look around 2 or 3 players which means he can't have had the best view of the incident and I don't think he could have been 100% sure and I don't feel as a referee you can give a penalty unless you are absolutely certain that it is and I can't see how he could have been there. Dare I say it, had it been at the other end I don't think he would have given it. The red card, I know Mills has gone in high and with two feet but I just think that if you go in for a tackle and you win the ball, I can't see how you can give a foul let alone a red card. If he had missed the ball and got the man then yes a red card would be justifiable but Matt's won the ball so I think that one was harsh. It reminded me of the Rodwell one against Liverpool and if we give red cards for challenges in which players win the ball, then it's going to become a non-contact sport. I think it did change the game as well and we wouldn't have been pushing forward in the manner that we were had we had 11 men and there wouldn't have been a massive Matt Mills shaped hole in the centre of defence. I can understand why Sven brought on John Pantsil because we did have 35-40 minutes of the game left so it was paramount we didn't concede another because we would have had no chance. If there had been say 15 minutes left then yes I would question it but I can understand Sven's thinking. As it was, I don't think John Pantsil had the best game when he came on. He failed to cover when Peltier when up for a header which let Marlon King in on goal and it was a good save by Kasper. I think definitely Beausejour should have been sent off. Peltier beat him all ends up and he kicked out at him to stop him getting into the area. A blatant foul and had it been the other way round, I think our player might have been booked. The King penalty shout, I actually don't think it was. I think Ridgewell stood his ground as he was entitled to do and you could say King went looking for it a little bit. It was similar to Bamba vs Cardiff where he stood his ground and the player ran into him. First half there was no doubt we dominated the ball and should have done more with it but Birmingham made it difficult for us to do that. I think Claridge gave a good analysis of the situation when he said that our midfield four were naturally narrow which you will always be when playing our system and that gave Birmingham two options: 1. Do what Derby did and play with an orthodox four across the middle which means that we will dominate possession in midfield but will also have more space to use the possession or 2. To play the four narrow and try and choke our midfield which is what they did and that is why we kept going square and back. I think it was also a reason why Birmingham didn't offer much going forward - because they had so many men behind the ball. We should have recognised this and the likes of Danns (who did this well against Derby) should have exploited the space out wide because when our full-backs got the ball, they were constantly having to pass inside and attacks stagnated. You don't have to be a winger to realise that there is space out wide and that you should use it. As a result we were too slow and ponderous in possession and too many times it was bad control, lack of movement and poor execution that cost us. 2nd half, I think Birmingham opened up a lot more and I think that would have suited us because we would have more space to play and create chances. As it was the game was changed by the red card. You could argue that we should have gone more attacking but last season we tried to play open attacking football every game and we had a good home record but an abysmal away record and I think Sven has set up more cautious away from home now and I think that is sensible. Later on in the season when the table has mapped itself out and we need to attack more away then we will but now, I think this approach is a shrewd one. At home, I think we will be more open and take the game to the opposition and away we will be more pragmatic. I think our game management was fairly decent up until the red card and I think we knew the game would open up 2nd half and played for it and so we didn't commit everyone forward like we would have maybe done 2nd half and I think Kapser said as much post match. But we couldn't legislate for something as game changing as the red card. Going forward, I think nothing less than 6 points will do against Watford and Millwall and we responded well the last time we had a disappointing result and I think we're still capable of gaining promotion. I think Richie Wellens and Beckford should come in. Wellens improved us so much when he came on and he actually played further forward where he can influence the game more and he had the intelligence and the positional awareness to know when to pull wide and when to come in and get involved with the play. I think Beckford coming in is more a reflection on how poor Darius was than how well he did when he came on. Vassell didn't take on players like he has been doing recently and neither did he get close enough to Nugent that when he won a header, there was nobody near him. I think that with us playing a defensively succeptable Watford side I think the Nugent - Beckford strike force which has the potential to be very good. Schmeichel Peltier - Bamba - SSL - Konchesky Abe Fernandes - Wellens King Beckford - Nugent Subs: Weale Pantsil Danns Johnson Vassell I've said it before and I'll say it again, all teams lose matches; but only the good ones respond.
Why is everyone suggesting King should stay in the side after another performance where he did more bad than good?!
calm down dear we were the better team today and the stand in ref was out to make his name we lost this game on a couple of contentious decisions from a ref who suddenly found himself on tv was his performance better than ours? or can i even dare to ask was he biased? our penalty appeal was far more nailed on than theirs and he had a strong bearing on the result of the game im sure we will finish above brum this season so keep calm
Not getting carried away... but: - The ref was disappointing (got my politically correct head on), but it was a penalty. - What the majority of people are saying is true - Sven isn't learning, and is making the same mistakes over and over again, without looking like it's going to change. Why should anything change in the next 5, 10, 15 games etc? The problem is, at the minute, we're getting it wrong more often than we're getting it right, and I don't think Sven knows how to tilt that balance in the right direction. THAT'S why people are beginning to get a bit twitchy.
Hate to say I told you so but...... Like I said a few weeks ago, I'd love to be wrong about Sven for the team's sake but sadly I don't think I am. Time will tell I suppose. My guess is that we'll bob around mid table until around Feb when the movement to get Sven out will rapidly gather pace.
