Roberto Martinez discussion

[TheHumbleEgg]

Then what about saying;

We scored three goals at Chelsea and that's enough to win.

Imagine though, come the season end, if a mere two more points would have gotten us EURO qualification...d'ya think BOB would lodge an appeal based on the CHELSEA victory?

 

[Chang Elephant]

If Bobby's a manager, he either buys a goalkeeper this window or start playing Robles. Otherwise, his judgement is similar to that of @bizzaro on FFP and needs discounting.

 

[chippy1722]

Then what about saying;

We scored three goals at Chelsea and that's enough to win.

Chelsea also scored three goals so that should have been enough for them to win too.

First thing I ever remember being taught playing footy as a kid, and it is by far the most used saying I ever heard growing up was " play to the whistle", now the Chelsea goal happened too quick for players to decide whether to play to it or not, but the amount of times premier league players stop or hesitate when expecting a whistle is ridiculous.

 

[ijjysmith]

Chelsea also scored three goals so that should have been enough for them to win too.

First thing I ever remember being taught playing footy as a kid, and it is by far the most used saying I ever heard growing up was " play to the whistle", now the Chelsea goal happened too quick for players to decide whether to play to it or not, but the amount of times premier league players stop or hesitate when expecting a whistle is ridiculous.

Well to be fair the last goal was 45 miles offside. (But that doesn't explain the crap defending from Mori and Besic (I think) before the ball even got anywhere near Terry).

 

[mkrudden]

Chelsea also scored three goals so that should have been enough for them to win too.

First thing I ever remember being taught playing footy as a kid, and it is by far the most used saying I ever heard growing up was " play to the whistle", now the Chelsea goal happened too quick for players to decide whether to play to it or not, but the amount of times premier league players stop or hesitate when expecting a whistle is ridiculous.

Well to be fair the last goal was 45 miles offside. (But that doesn't explain the crap defending from Mori and Besic (I think) before the ball even got anywhere near Terry).

I really think the whistle point is a poor, poor defence.
You're quite right chippy, we should be defending until the whistle blows for full time. Martinez was completely wrong on this point imo.

However, and it's clear how strongly I feel as I am so repetitive on this....

John Terry is offside. If he is onside, he doesnt get to the ball from Oscar.
Being offside is against the rules of the game.
We scored 3 goals WITHIN the rules of the game.
Chelsea scored 2.

We SHOULD be aggrieved. We went to the champions who, despite poor form, are full of attacking talent and scored more legitimate goals that them. We cannot ask for more than that from this young, inexperienced team.

 

[Ihaters]

Oh yeah, I wouldn't confine that comment to this forum. It's all over the place.

It's very odd in that it's not really based on performance or result. This type of constant questioning usually comes about for managers struggling to keep a team's head above water, when in reality this one is flying and everyone accepts that a) it's the best squad (which he built) for decades and that b ) we're playing some of the best attacking football for decades.

I said from the get go when Martinez arrived that his biggest task here was to re-educate Evertonians to learn to embrace the game their own club was synonymous with in the past. That was correct, and it's turning out to be an almighty cultural battle between himself and those of us who see what the vision is on the one hand, and, on the other, those who are struggling against the imposition of that vision and who hark back to the near past and that way of playing the game, and who are determined to find fault with everything that happens.

That's the crux of it.

And a third group that don't want us conceding loads of soft goals and wasting the good work he's doing by only being able to beat dross at the foot of the table or teams in the cup. This is rightly annoying a lot of people no matter how much you criticize them wanting us to do better.

 

[Lanolin]

I really think the whistle point is a poor, poor defence.
You're quite right chippy, we should be defending until the whistle blows for full time. Martinez was completely wrong on this point imo.

However, and it's clear how strongly I feel as I am so repetitive on this....

John Terry is offside. If he is onside, he doesnt get to the ball from Oscar.
Being offside is against the rules of the game.
We scored 3 goals WITHIN the rules of the game.
Chelsea scored 2.

We SHOULD be aggrieved. We went to the champions who, despite poor form, are full of attacking talent and scored more legitimate goals that them. We cannot ask for more than that from this young, inexperienced team.

I completely agree that we should be aggrieved. Any time an important decision goes against you you should be aggrieved, and I'm absolutely fuming about the decision believe me.

I don't think we should just put it down to bad luck though, and say we did everything right and couldn't have done any more. We could, clearly. Let's be honest, if everything had happened as it did but the flag had gone up, we would have been thinking it was lucky that the linesman had got it right. Mistakes happen all the time, we know that. We should have conceded penalties in both games against city and against palace, we shouldn't have conceded a penalty against stoke. The fact that the decision was wrong shouldn't stop us from looking at what we could have done differently and Roberto's interview (rightly or wrongly) gave the impression that he felt that was unnecessary.

As an aside, the team that was on the pitch at the end of the game had 2106 Premier League appearances between them. There's god knows how many cup games, games in other leagues and internationals to go on top of that. Yes we have some young players, but putting everything down to inexperience just doesn't wash.

 

[Brendan Janus]

Imagine though, come the season end, if a mere two more points would have gotten us EURO qualification...d'ya think BOB would lodge an appeal based on the CHELSEA victory?

No because John Stones could quite easily have cost us a point against Citeh !1

&

 

[Ashtonian]

I completely agree that we should be aggrieved. Any time an important decision goes against you you should be aggrieved, and I'm absolutely fuming about the decision believe me.

I don't think we should just put it down to bad luck though, and say we did everything right and couldn't have done any more. We could, clearly. Let's be honest, if everything had happened as it did but the flag had gone up, we would have been thinking it was lucky that the linesman had got it right. Mistakes happen all the time, we know that. We should have conceded penalties in both games against city and against palace, we shouldn't have conceded a penalty against stoke. The fact that the decision was wrong shouldn't stop us from looking at what we could have done differently and Roberto's interview (rightly or wrongly) gave the impression that he felt that was unnecessary.

As an aside, the team that was on the pitch at the end of the game had 2106 Premier League appearances between them. There's god knows how many cup games, games in other leagues and internationals to go on top of that. Yes we have some young players, but putting everything down to inexperience just doesn't wash.

in a general sense one goal came a minute after the game should have ended and was technically 'illegal' to the rules of the game.

One goal was a massive slice of luck, that doesnt perfectly delfect past howard and it doesn't go in, god knows that wasn't the intention to do it.

So on another day the game finishes 3-1 technically and only a defensive balls up can be picked on being a weakness on the day.

 

[USABlue]

in a general sense one goal came a minute after the game should have ended and was technically 'illegal' to the rules of the game.

One goal was a massive slice of luck, that doesnt perfectly delfect past howard and it doesn't go in, god knows that wasn't the intention to do it.

So on another day the game finishes 3-1 technically and only a defensive balls up can be picked on being a weakness on the day.

Tbf if you're using that argument it would technically be 2-1 as Baines cross took a deflection in as well...either their last goal being counted was terrible. Just need to move on, beat Swansea and focus on city. Can't change what's happened

 

[Muggins]

Martinez is known for saying he is building something.

Unfortunately for Bobby, I personally think the years of building teams have long gone.

If you are not near the top then your best players will leave or be sold.

Money and glory will always prevail over patience in this game.

In game odds.

 

[Lanolin]

in a general sense one goal came a minute after the game should have ended and was technically 'illegal' to the rules of the game.

One goal was a massive slice of luck, that doesnt perfectly delfect past howard and it doesn't go in, god knows that wasn't the intention to do it.

So on another day the game finishes 3-1 technically and only a defensive balls up can be picked on being a weakness on the day.

On another day Barkley's shot goes in instead of hitting the post, Mirallas finishes when through one on one and we win 5-0. Or Terry sorts his feet out instead of nudging it in to his own net, Chelsea learn from the mistake of the first goal and stop the cross from the left for the second, and Deulofeu's corner goes into the area it was intended for instead of being returned to him for the third so we lose 3-0.

Personally I don't see the harm in analysing what actually happened in the game and trying to work out where it went wrong. We can't change the result, but we can learn from it.

 

[Stanley Parker]

On another day Barkley's shot goes in instead of hitting the post, Mirallas finishes when through one on one and we win 5-0. Or Terry sorts his feet out instead of nudging it in to his own net, Chelsea learn from the mistake of the first goal and stop the cross from the left for the second, and Deulofeu's corner goes into the area it was intended for instead of being returned to him for the third so we lose 3-0.

Personally I don't see the harm in analysing what actually happened in the game and trying to work out where it went wrong. We can't change the result, but we can learn from it.

But what are the lessons to be learned from the result?

Finish the game early?

Score more goals than they do?

Don't deflect the ball into your own net?

Introduce the goalkeeper to the centre back?

Don't trust the linesman?

 

[Stanley Parker]

Chelsea also scored three goals so that should have been enough for them to win too.

First thing I ever remember being taught playing footy as a kid, and it is by far the most used saying I ever heard growing up was " play to the whistle", now the Chelsea goal happened too quick for players to decide whether to play to it or not, but the amount of times premier league players stop or hesitate when expecting a whistle is ridiculous.

But they didn't score three goals - the referee gave them the third goal.

The defence held their line, and Terry was in an offside position when he put the ball in the net.

The defence acted correctly - and the the linesman was at fault when there wasn't a whistle.

It could have been worse. When Roberto was at Wigan, Chelsea were allowed two offside goals. Time for video replays, I think.

 

[Lanolin]

But what are the lessons to be learned from the result?

Finish the game early?

Score more goals than they do?

Don't deflect the ball into your own net?

Introduce the goalkeeper to the centre back?

Don't trust the linesman?

Some of those are valid yes.

I would say that pushing too many players forward when leading 2-0 played a part in us not winning, so we could learn to not do that. I would say not closing people down quickly enough led to a deflected goal so we could work on that. I would say that our heads dropped badly after their first goal and the second looked a matter of time straight away so we could try to stop that happening in future. We could work on the communication between goalkeeper and defence as that appears to be a recurring problem, as does the communication between centre halves. We could reiterate the importance of keeping hold of the ball and not being more bothered about individual glory when we seemingly have three points in the bag. We could work on attacking aerial balls as that has cost us a number of goals this season.

Or we could stick our fingers in our ears going 'la la la offside la la extra 55 seconds la la nothing to see here'.

As i said, I see no harm in looking at what went wrong and being objective. I think in some games this year we've played very well and deserved more than we got, in others I think we've probably been a bit lucky to get away with points. Some people will just look and say win = good performance, clean sheet = defended well and vice versa. That's fine, just not my cup of tea.