jimbobton Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Skunks losing ....and still no shots on target Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LargsTON Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 ....and still no shots on target I don't mean to be rude but who gives a fuck. "CORNBEEF IS A BELLEND" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerton Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Dundee Utd now top the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbobton Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 I don't mean to be rude but who gives a ****. Hmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_M Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Ft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaunTon Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Satisfactory result Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRVMP Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 4 pens in our last 5 games! Establishment club. Today's result vindicated Duffy's approach to the fixture - other than a poor goal to concede it sounded fairly comfortable. Two fine results in a row (well, maybe three). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Could’ve been 7 if it wasn’t for 3 very good saves from their keeper near the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoon Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Good win. Started off very well and died down a wee bit but result was never really in doubt. Their keeper losing the rag with the kids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted December 2, 2017 Author Share Posted December 2, 2017 I thought that we were pretty poor for the most part. Lamie as a left back and Doyle as right back meant that we were largely ineffective out wide. The middle sixty minutes was labourious stuff until the penalty finished them off. They are a gang: Edinburgh City levels of shan. Had we been playing well then double figures would have been a distinct possibility. The points over recent weeks are very welcome but we need to be realistic - we'll need to play far better next week to keep this run going. The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before.. So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Von Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Comfortable victory, should’ve got a few more to boost the goal difference at the end. Thought we were denied 2 stonewall penalties, and the one we got was very soft. Oliver and Harkins were our stand out players, and Murdoch had a pretty poor game. Good to see Jai get a goal, and the Scum getting beat was an added bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedrodelawasp Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 I thought Harkins was really good today. Putting effort in to close people down, but also regularly anticipating passes across the midfield and cutting them out, often starting attacking moves for us in the process. Had a mighty chuckle at their keeper raging at the kids behind his goal, but have to give him credit for 3/4 good saves towards the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyrshireTon Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 I noticed Gaston applauding the last save. As for the game -comfortable in the end and they visibly chucked it at 3-1 as demonstrated by the lazy arsed pass back for the 4th. The first two goals were well hit, despite the poor defending for their goal. I was convinced Tiffoney fluked our 2nd but others reckon he meant it and the 3rd was a clear penalty but are the type that are more often not given. The stonewaller in the first half - the only possible reason for not giving it could be that th ball was out before the keeper made contact, but I don’t think the referee was that clued up. Edit - just seen the tontastic pic on Twitter. Clear penalty, ref’s an arsehole. Defence needs tightening for next week. McGhee needs some support, there's no-one backing him up. Hayes playing it forward, Bell being forced to do it all alone, now forward from Marr, here's Ritchie, still Andy Ritchie, look at the control... That is a marvellous goal from Andy Ritchie. Twenty minutes on the clock and Morton's supporters come alive. A goal which epitomises the control, the arrogance, the cheek of Andy Ritchie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bewilderedbeast Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 I noticed Gaston applauding the last save. As for the game -comfortable in the end and they visibly chucked it at 3-1 as demonstrated by the lazy arsed pass back for the 4th. The first two goals were well hit, despite the poor defending for their goal. I was convinced Tiffoney fluked our 2nd but others reckon he meant it and the 3rd was a clear penalty but are the type that are more often not given. The stonewaller in the first half - the only possible reason for not giving it could be that th ball was out before the keeper made contact, but I don’t think the referee was that clued up. Edit - just seen the tontastic pic on Twitter. Clear penalty, ref’s an arsehole. Defence needs tightening for next week. Honestly don't think that it was a penalty, (awaits pelters), Thomson clearly headed the ball before the keeper made contact. He may well have been put off by the keeper advancing towards him, but that's the keeper job.Yes, he wiped him out but by that time, as you say above, the ball was out of playing range and clearly going over the bar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_M Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Honestly don't think that it was a penalty, (awaits pelters), Thomson clearly headed the ball before the keeper made contact. He may well have been put off by the keeper advancing towards him, but that's the keeper job. Yes, he wiped him out but by that time, as you say above, the ball was out of playing range and clearly going over the bar. So he 'wiped him out' in an off the ball incident? Still a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bewilderedbeast Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 So he 'wiped him out' in an off the ball incident? Still a penalty. How many times have you seen the ball running ahead of a forward clearly going out of play and there being no chance of the forward, or anyone else playing the ball and the forward being brought down, either by the keeper or defender and nothing being given. Thomson had already won the ball and it was going over the bar, had it hit the bar and came back into play then it was a penalty all day long as he had a chance of getting to the rebound had the keeper not collided with him. Playing devils advocate, had the keeper collected the ball and collided with Thomson, would that have been a penalty? It was two players committed to getting to the ball who ended up colliding with each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunning1874 Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Honestly don't think that it was a penalty, (awaits pelters), Thomson clearly headed the ball before the keeper made contact. He may well have been put off by the keeper advancing towards him, but that's the keeper job. Yes, he wiped him out but by that time, as you say above, the ball was out of playing range and clearly going over the bar. The fact Thomson plays the ball before the goalkeeper makes contact is what makes it a foul. I've never understood the 'he got his shot away' line of argument, it's absolutely irrelevant. If a player plays a pass then someone slides right through them after the ball is gone no one says 'well, he got the pass away so it's fine to clatter him' - catching the player after the ball is gone makes it a late challenge and a blatant foul. It's the exact same when someone's hitting a shot or going up for a header. Thomson goes up, wins the header then gets taken out well after the ball is gone. Where the ball is going is irrelevant. It's a late challenge that's clearly a foul, and in this case the height Smith caught him at made it dangerous so it should have been a red card as well. Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake Oh Lord, Brian Wake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiGi Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Honestly don't think that it was a penalty, (awaits pelters), Thomson clearly headed the ball before the keeper made contact. He may well have been put off by the keeper advancing towards him, but that's the keeper job. Yes, he wiped him out but by that time, as you say above, the ball was out of playing range and clearly going over the bar. So you're saying as long as the ball is going out of play you can challenge as late as you want with impunity? It was a foul and therefore penalty. Doesn't matter where the ball was going. It was late and the ball was still in play. Peter Weatherson is the greatest player since Ritchie, and should be assigned 'chairman for life' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximusprimes Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Honestly don't think that it was a penalty, (awaits pelters), Thomson clearly headed the ball before the keeper made contact. He may well have been put off by the keeper advancing towards him, but that's the keeper job. Yes, he wiped him out but by that time, as you say above, the ball was out of playing range and clearly going over the bar. If a player passes the ball and then gets cleaned out in a slide tackle or barge it's a free kick every time and usually a booking, I think getting punched in the face after heading the ball has to be a foul by those rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_M Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 How many times have you seen the ball running ahead of a forward clearly going out of play and there being no chance of the forward, or anyone else playing the ball and the forward being brought down, either by the keeper or defender and nothing being given. Thomson had already won the ball and it was going over the bar, had it hit the bar and came back into play then it was a penalty all day long as he had a chance of getting to the rebound had the keeper not collided with him. Playing devils advocate, had the keeper collected the ball and collided with Thomson, would that have been a penalty? It was two players committed to getting to the ball who ended up colliding with each other. Doesn't matter how often it happens and it's not given. It's a foul, a late challenge that gets nowhere near the ball, and it's a penalty. Refs having previous for shiting out of it in the past has nothing to do with it. A foul is a foul. Same goes for tugging and pulling and pushing at corners. Just because it is normally ignored does not mean it is not a foul and should be given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.