The Luckiest Win I Can Remember

[Wapping Blade]

Or if the referee had realised Coventry had took one of their chances...

You don't give up do you fella? The ref would have to have been standing on the line to give it.

 

[Ashtonsmashton]

It was a Christmas Miracle

 

[PeteBlade]

You don't give up do you fella? The ref would have to have been standing on the line to give it.

Trying to inject sense above tribalism?
No. No I do not.

 

[Coily]

You don't give up do you fella? The ref would have to have been standing on the line to give it.

We probably got lucky, but there in 0% chance the ref or lino could have been sure it was in, and in that case they can't give a goal. How they missed Collins punching it toward our own goal however...

 

[Bert]

If Sky and their fifty cameras can't demonstrate that it was in what chance does the Ref have? It wasn't a goal because the Ref didn't give it.
Move on.

 

[boo radley]

Ugliest!

Have you just come across that picture of Walthy again?

 

[Toledo Blade]

And that's not luck, that's crap finishing by the oppostion

Perhaps the main reason we cite luck as an excuse is a desire, conscious or not, to alleviate the pain of adversity. After all, much better to have been unlucky than outclassed, right? Preferable to have been unlucky with decisions than to have lost due to profligacy in front of goal, surely? This, however, is an extremely misleading pattern of thinking. It diverts attention away from shortcomings and fosters attitudes amongst management, players and fan-bases that they are somehow being persecuted by fate.

In the results-based world of football, where every fine and minor detail is analysed meticulously in search of marginal gains, excusing failure due to luck seems hopelessly out of place.

Football is a game of exceptional skill. If a team hasn't won a game, there will always be reasons why. There will always, without exception, be something which could have been done better.

Truth be told, luck plays almost no part in football. Anything that occurs on the field of play must be accepted within the context of the game. Every match will have twists and turns and there will always be controversy, but that is simply the by-product of a series of very deliberate actions – namely, two teams trying to win a football match. So you are correct I will never mention luck again.

 

[HillmortonBlade]

Perhaps the main reason we cite luck as an excuse is a desire, conscious or not, to alleviate the pain of adversity. After all, much better to have been unlucky than outclassed, right? Preferable to have been unlucky with decisions than to have lost due to profligacy in front of goal, surely? This, however, is an extremely misleading pattern of thinking. It diverts attention away from shortcomings and fosters attitudes amongst management, players and fan-bases that they are somehow being persecuted by fate.

In the results-based world of football, where every fine and minor detail is analysed meticulously in search of marginal gains, excusing failure due to luck seems hopelessly out of place.

Football is a game of exceptional skill. If a team hasn't won a game, there will always be reasons why. There will always, without exception, be something which could have been done better.

Truth be told, luck plays almost no part in football. Anything that occurs on the field of play must be accepted within the context of the game. Every match will have twists and turns and there will always be controversy, but that is simply the by-product of a series of very deliberate actions – namely, two teams trying to win a football match. So you are correct I will never mention luck again.

I did not want to appear facetious, but (and not as eloquently put as your post) had Cov either played to their potential and/or we had allowed to them to, the result would have been different perhaps.

Though I have sobered up since my posting last night!

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

We fought, scrapped and battled for the first time I can remember in a long time.

Doesnt fit in with the status quo but Hammond and McEverley were superb today.

Let's not knock them tonight.

United have me spitting feathers most of the time, but I thought that yesterday although we weren't brilliant, it was a decent battling display against a good Coventry side albeit one that may still have a few weaknesses that could cost them. I thought Jay and Hammond were walking a bit of a tightrope but for me it was Hammonds best display for us and McEverley played okay. The one downside for me was Collo trying his best to gift them three points with his big time Charlie act and Edgar looking lost every time he had the ball. Two wins on the trot, and beating Coventry, a side I fully expected to give us a hammering. Well done boys, long way to go yet though.

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

There really shouldn't be much debate here.

We are an awful side.

Coventry were better than us today.

Mceveley should have been sent off.

Hammond should have been sent off.

We had one 'shot' on target, where the ball hit Sharp, in 90mins at home.

We have no pace.

We play boring football.

We can't keep possession, we always get out passed in midfield.

Collins is woeful.

There's very little in there to disagree with IMO. Much needs to change before we can compete with the top sides. this truly is papering over the cracks as on another day, Coventry would have beaten us comfortably.

Can't disagree with most of that Blader. I am one United biggest critics but yesterday I saw a team show a bit of fight and get a result, not lay on its back and have its tummy tickled by the likes of Shrewsbury. Of course it's papering over the cracks and much more is needed, but there was a tiny ray of light yesterday. Still need a serious overhaul come Jan though.

 

[Bladesman]

If Sky and their fifty cameras can't demonstrate that it was in what chance does the Ref have? It wasn't a goal because the Ref didn't give it.
Move on.

Bert should takeover Sky TV.

 

[metalblade]

Looks to me like certain posters are not happy unless they are moaning about something, I am looked on as one of the more negative posters on the forum but phuck me some on this thread take being negative to a new level. Any dozy twat can say the ball was definitely over the line it doesn't make it true no more than me saying it didn't doesn't make it true, If anyone has seen a replay that 100% shows one way or the other please post the link. I'll not hold my breath though while waiting because no one will post a link it would not run with the moaning agenda, I don't know why they can't all be happy and shut the fook up we got a much needed win.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

I'm sorry metalblade, but that's exactly the sort of reasoning I can't understand. If United win nobody should say anything negative - anyone who claims that Coventry got the ball over the line but the goal wasn't given is a "dozy twat" with a "moaning agenda" - anyone who thinks the ball crossed the line should instead just "be happy" (although I don't see many posters saying that they are unhappy with a win either way) and should just "shut the fook up".
It brings the debate to a whole new level, don't you think?
Personally, I am able to view incidents on the pitch in a pretty neutral light. I can have a view whether a ball crossed the line, someone made a bad foul, a penalty should or shouldn't have been given, etc. etc., without having to first check which team is which. Nor do I only see things a certain way depending on whether it makes me "happy" or not. I'm happy McE didn't get a red card. I think he should have had one. I'm happy he was able to carry on and play a half-decent role in our clean sheet. I don't think he should commit wreckless tackles. See how it works?
Some people are suddenly claiming that without scientific, certified proof, no one is allowed to say the ball was over the line. When did that happen? Perhaps it's because the PL now has goal-line tech no one is now allowed an opinion.
My opinion from watching the match on TV, not having seen it since, is that it was over the line, as certainly as any other incident like that that I've seen. It doesn't make me unhappy. It isn't part of a moaning agenda. I'm as glad as anyone that we've got 3 points out of it, anything less would have been a disaster, this could actually be the start of our rise up the division.
If you think it makes me a dozy twat, that's fine by me. You probably don't want to know what I think of your post (though I would likely aim my comments at your post, and not your person).
And if people who are adamant it wasn't over can put their hand on their heart and say that, if the teams were reversed, they would be saying "you can't say it's over the line without proof, United shouldn't have been given it", wouldn't be blasting the useless officials, wouldn't be claiming their keeper's comments made it as certain as anything that he knew it was over, then fine, I respect their view. I, on the other hand, would be shouting like hell that we should have been given a goal.

 

[HouchensHead]

I agree. That was a good post Hamburg Blade.

 

[metalblade]

I'm sorry metalblade, but that's exactly the sort of reasoning I can't understand. If United win nobody should say anything negative - anyone who claims that Coventry got the ball over the line but the goal wasn't given is a "dozy twat" with a "moaning agenda" - anyone who thinks the ball crossed the line should instead just "be happy" (although I don't see many posters saying that they are unhappy with a win either way) and should just "shut the fook up".
It brings the debate to a whole new level, don't you think?
Personally, I am able to view incidents on the pitch in a pretty neutral light. I can have a view whether a ball crossed the line, someone made a bad foul, a penalty should or shouldn't have been given, etc. etc., without having to first check which team is which. Nor do I only see things a certain way depending on whether it makes me "happy" or not. I'm happy McE didn't get a red card. I think he should have had one. I'm happy he was able to carry on and play a half-decent role in our clean sheet. I don't think he should commit wreckless tackles. See how it works?
Some people are suddenly claiming that without scientific, certified proof, no one is allowed to say the ball was over the line. When did that happen? Perhaps it's because the PL now has goal-line tech no one is now allowed an opinion.
My opinion from watching the match on TV, not having seen it since, is that it was over the line, as certainly as any other incident like that that I've seen. It doesn't make me unhappy. It isn't part of a moaning agenda. I'm as glad as anyone that we've got 3 points out of it, anything less would have been a disaster, this could actually be the start of our rise up the division.
If you think it makes me a dozy twat, that's fine by me. You probably don't want to know what I think of your post (though I would likely aim my comments at your post, and not your person).
And if people who are adamant it wasn't over can put their hand on their heart and say that, if the teams were reversed, they would be saying "you can't say it's over the line without proof, United shouldn't have been given it", wouldn't be blasting the useless officials, wouldn't be claiming their keeper's comments made it as certain as anything that he knew it was over, then fine, I respect their view. I, on the other hand, would be shouting like hell that we should have been given a goal.

Wow you're touchy but if the cap fits an all that ................... I just didn't see you as the poster who has been stating "the ball crossed the line FACT because I say so" but can't post a link to show it did over the last half a dozen pages. If a link had been posted maybe just maybe others would not think people were moaning for the sake of it or have an agenda to pull the team down.

 

[Ecco1889]

I've just seen mac's late lunge on the cov player,didn't realise how bad it was,they don't come much worse than that tbh,it was our day and 3 unexpected but lovely points
Just got a horrible feeling a red card will be waiting for us in the next match

 

[grafikhaus]

Looks to me like certain posters are not happy unless they are moaning about something, I am looked on as one of the more negative posters on the forum but phuck me some on this thread take being negative to a new level. Any dozy twat can say the ball was definitely over the line it doesn't make it true no more than me saying it didn't doesn't make it true, If anyone has seen a replay that 100% shows one way or the other please post the link. I'll not hold my breath though while waiting because no one will post a link it would not run with the moaning agenda, I don't know why they can't all be happy and shut the fook up we got a much needed win.

...and...

I'm sorry metalblade, but that's exactly the sort of reasoning I can't understand. If United win nobody should say anything negative - anyone who claims that Coventry got the ball over the line but the goal wasn't given is a "dozy twat" with a "moaning agenda" - anyone who thinks the ball crossed the line should instead just "be happy" (although I don't see many posters saying that they are unhappy with a win either way) and should just "shut the fook up".
It brings the debate to a whole new level, don't you think?

I've got to say I agree with Hamburg. Whether the ball crossed the line, whether J-Mac should have walked is irrelvant. The fact is we were unbelievably poor on Sunday - as we have been in almost every game this season. The guy on Football Heaven kept fielding the (many) complaints by repeating the mantra 'But United won, didn't they?' Yes, they did. But playing like that, we'll get some hammerings before the end of the season. 'Papering over the cracks' is being generous. A 'dead cat bounce' would be more accurate.

 

[metalblade]

...and...



I've got to say I agree with Hamburg. Whether the ball crossed the line, whether J-Mac should have walked is irrelvant. The fact is we were unbelievably poor on Sunday - as we have been in almost every game this season. The guy on Football Heaven kept fielding the (many) complaints by repeating the mantra 'But United won, didn't they?' Yes, they did. But playing like that, we'll get some hammerings before the end of the season. 'Papering over the cracks' is being generous. A 'dead cat bounce' would be more accurate.

I don't know where anyone has said we were good on Sunday I think it is universally agreed we were crap and yes whether the ball crossed the line is irrelevant so why are certain posters on this thread claiming it was over the line as a stick to beat the club with ? not one of them can prove it was over the line. Someone with an agenda writing FACT does make something a fact only one man's opinion matters and that is the referee's he says no goal as do the history books time to move on and get behind the team who as least showed fight and effort, lack of quality can be forgiven to a certain extent.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

Wow you're touchy but if the cap fits an all that ................... I just didn't see you as the poster who has been stating "the ball crossed the line FACT because I say so" but can't post a link to show it did over the last half a dozen pages. If a link had been posted maybe just maybe others would not think people were moaning for the sake of it or have an agenda to pull the team down.

You call someone a dozy twat and tell them to shut the fook up and then say "wow you're touchy" when they reply - a reply, I might add, that did not attack you at a personal level, like you did with others (including me). Yes I know you were including other people in your attack, but I can only speak for myself and have, I hope, made my position clearer.

 

[metalblade]

You call someone a dozy twat and tell them to shut the fook up and then say "wow you're touchy" when they reply - a reply, I might add, that did not attack you at a personal level, like you did with others (including me). Yes I know you were including other people in your attack, but I can only speak for myself and have, I hope, made my position clearer.

Yep you're paranoid.

 

[Northyorksblade]

But today wasn't 'any other day' it was 13-12-15 and we won 1-0 ,look at the paper in the morning.

Exactly what I said to the moaning Coventry fan I was watching with, who moaned about our kick and rush tactics and how he'd hate to watch that every game. Gave up trying to tell him it wasn't typical of us. Walked out with a smile on my face, which is more than he did

 

[Hamburg Blade]

Yep you're paranoid.

 

[PeteBlade]

I think it's possible to think the ball went over the line due to the available evidence without:

A: Having an agenda or
B: 'Needing' to moan

Some people think they'll be thrown out of the bigger Blades club if they don't blindly try and back every decision that goes out way.

 

[Bladesman]

I expect Adkins doesn't want that to be the way we play but he will be happy that the players fought for the win.

As for the goal that wasn't given I don't give a toss. We had one ruled out that was in against Oldham. I've seen enough decisions like that go against us in the past. Not even sure why it's still being debated.

We may as well look ahead to the Scunthorpe match and hope we can improve.

 

[blade too long]

Let's not forget, we should have been down to 10, they had a cast iron penalty ignored and scored a goal which wasn't given. Even our goal was ugly and pathetic.

3 points was the only positive to take out of that and I have no idea whatsoever how we got them. Hodgy must have put in a good word with the big man today.

cest la vie
didnt Brayford have a goal chalked off last week
The ref gave Coventry 40 fouls when we breathed on them , and they got away with murder
did you miss the ironic cheering for the 3 fouls we got
not sending off mceverly , how many opposition players get away with that,
was that clumsy ref could see it wasnt malicious , just gormless
I have seen around 10 penalties for us not given this season , so

we werent lucky , its what football calls levelling out
cant remember Coventry having an attempt at goal they manuafactured themselves
they had the brilliant luck Collins kept setting them up
now thats luck
why dont we get opposition players having complete mares

 

[JonnyRed(WCFC)]

Ok..i watched your highlights from sunday..i think you had to set up that way, a mobile but lightweight team as Coventry are usually find it hard to break down a more physical stop-you-playing type team , if you'd had more creativity/potency going forward like say from a few years back then you'd have stomped on them 3-0 probably!

As for the was it/wasn't it a goal...wasnt a deliberate handball initially although some referees wouldve given it by the letters of the law...the deflection made the ball spin which caused Long the problem in handling it somewhat (as a 5 aside keeper i know they can pop out so easily and you always look a twat coz nobody realizes its like a Shane Warne googly!) , but his stroke of luck was the referee/linesman saw the ball bounce down on the back of the line so it wasnt fully over at that point...what they couldnt see was when it bounced back up and it was still spinning which did cause it to go over and Long was clever enough to shield the view of it and show the quickness of hands to snatch it back and not look guilty at the same time!

As for the luckiest win i can remember... Oooh, it was definitely that play off semi in 2003!

*tiptoes out with fishing rod behind back*

 

[blade too long]

good point the 4-3 win over Forest , we had been worse in the opening 65 minutes in that game as anything Ive ever seen

people say we cant turn our season round with half of it to go

but we turned a dreadful performance into a golden memory

we wet from shit to wonderful in 120 minutes