Raith vs Queen’s Park, 2 Sept 2023

[qpfc]

5 hours ago, McGuigan1978 said:

If he thinks Charlie Fox was getting back, then fair enough, but considering he's a bog standard, meat and potatoes central defender who is fairly slow

Whether it’s a red or not, that’s arguably the most inaccurate description I’ve seen regarding Charlie Fox as a player. Aye he struggled massively last third of the season (as did everyone tbf) and his borderline assault of a red card at starks last season probably helped reinforce your description of him. There was also an adaptation period in the early cup matches regarding style of play but he’s generally excellent on the ball and has brilliant recovery pace which are arguably his biggest assets. Would go as far to say he’s one of best ball playing centre backs in the league. He just had to get his confidence back on the ball after Coyle destroyed it. Interesting how others see players, game of opinions I guess

Edited September 6, 2023 by qpfc

[foreverarover]

9 hours ago, R.R.FC said:

Yeah it appears some people are fooled by Charlie Fox doing the thing every defender does of continuing to run back as the foul takes place and also after the ref has given the free kick so he looks like he is well back and covering when the reality is without the foul he would have been nowhere near catching Hamilton.

The picture from when the foul took place to when the ref arrived on the scene is very different but thankfully he was switched on enough to come to the correct decision. The first picture is after Hamilton has went down and the whistle has been blown and it looks like Fox is covering (still wide and quite far from the ball mind you). Second photo shows the actual foul taking place and Fox is barely in the picture he wasn’t getting back to cover.

You could make the argument about the distance to goal but given it is a completely free run with no defenders it’s a pretty clear cut goal scoring opportunity to me and the ref and subsequent appeals panel clearly agree.

 

There is not a chance that left back is getting ant where near the forward. 

Edited September 6, 2023 by foreverarover

[Broken Algorithms]

5 hours ago, foreverarover said:

There is not a chance that left back is getting ant where near the forward. 

I've always felt it wasn't a red, but the in amount of lifting people are doing to suggest Fox was somehow going to be able to cover the ground between Hamilton and the goal is strange. You'd think it's Mark Yardley versus Roberto Carlos. 

[ribzanelli]

If the QP board had access to those pictures on the last page and still went ahead with the appeal, they should be taking pelters from their own fans. The appeals board were only ever going to deal in facts and not get into calculating the probability of the left back getting back. Did he play the man with no attempt to play the ball? Yes. Was the striker clean through? Yes. 

Edited September 7, 2023 by ribzanelli

[Double Jack D]

2 hours ago, ribzanelli said:

If the QP board had access to those pictures on the last page and still went ahead with the appeal, they should be taking pelters from their own fans. The appeals board were only ever going to deal in facts and not get into calculating the probability of the left back getting back. Did he play the man with no attempt to play the ball? Yes. Was the striker clean through? Yes. 

They're from the match highlights, there's every chance they were part of the appeal.

At the match I thought it was a soft red, however the rules of the game have been followed to the letter. Well done to the ref.

[Spider1975]

On 06/09/2023 at 15:58, McGuigan1978 said:

If he thinks Charlie Fox was getting back, then fair enough, but considering he's a bog standard, meat and potatoes central defender who is fairly slow

I won't repeat what @qpfc has stated, but think that's a bit unfair - for no other reason that the fact he's also got a left foot like a traction engine.

With regards the high-line, again it's the style of play/concept that Beuker and Veldman and the rest of the coaching staff as a whole are trying to implement long-term, from the kids upwards.  

Towards the end of last year QP lost their way a bit when they stopped playing out from the back and seemed reliant on Fox and others playing long, floaty-balls into the corners, resulting in not much to show for it.  It seemed at times that Coyle had either run out of ideas, or had lost the dressing room a bit.  

The squad is young, relatively new and, importantly still learning, therefore it will inevitably be high risk (initially) and hopefully, eventually, high reward.  Time will tell whether it finally 'clicks' and I daresay that we'll take a few beatings, but ultimately we pay our cash on a Saturday to be entertained, and as a QP fan (off and on) since the mid-80's, I can genuinely say (for non-medical reasons) the pulse and BP haven't been this high for a while....and I'll take that anyway.

Also, importantly, we've taken a punt on a relatively inexperienced manager, he'll be learning (to a certain extent) on the job too....I'm hoping he's learned a fair bit from last weekend.

Edited September 7, 2023 by Spider1975

[Rovers_Lad]

Not just because he called the red card correctly but I thought  the ref had a good game on Saturday and was one of the better ones I,ve seen in our games this season so far

[Stuntiethumper]

On 06/09/2023 at 15:58, McGuigan1978 said:

Fair play to "Stuntiethumper," who has quoted the entire rule and not added anything much to the conversation. 

If he thinks Charlie Fox was getting back, then fair enough, but considering he's a bog standard, meat and potatoes central defender who is fairly slow and a good bit away, I don't think he is. 

Regardless, as has been pointed out in the chat, Queen's Park's inability to get anything out of this game, had less to do with the referee, and all to do with Robin Veldman. 

The triple substitution was wild, and has been covered enough, but asking your back four to play so high, and play from the back, when they can do neither, is very, very odd, and will completely hamstring the Spiders this season. 

I lost count of the amount of times times a defender played it out of play, to no-one, or to a Rovers player, and while I loved every second, I cannot understand why Queen's Park persist with it. It'll cost them dear week in, week out. 

Not my best post I confess. In pasting Law 12 and bolding the sections on distance to goal and position of the defenders I was trying to highlight that in my (coloured view obviously) the referee and appeals board didn't give this enough credence to those points.  If your man was 20 or 30 yards from goal I would have no complaints with a red but when he is on the halfway line...a bit of harsh interpretation.   Anyway time to move on.  The glamour of somewhere we have never heard of in Wales now beckons...

[TxRover]

52 minutes ago, Stuntiethumper said:

Not my best post I confess. In pasting Law 12 and bolding the sections on distance to goal and position of the defenders I was trying to highlight that in my (coloured view obviously) the referee and appeals board didn't give this enough credence to those points.  If your man was 20 or 30 yards from goal I would have no complaints with a red but when he is on the halfway line...a bit of harsh interpretation.   Anyway time to move on.  The glamour of somewhere we have never heard of in Wales now beckons...

Not to drag it back out, but I'm perplexed as to why the idea of the distance to the goal is ever applied to these fouls. If the entire side was in the penalty area for a corner, and the ball knocks out to an attacker in the D, he's near enough 100 yards from goal, but may have no one between him and the keeper/goal. In that case, the ruling would be the same if he's yanked down by an opponent...the position on the field, with regard to distance, is irrelevant.

As for the trip, here you go: https://www.tripadvisor.com/Tourism-g672155-Bala_Snowdonia_National_Park_North_Wales_Wales-Vacations.html

[basher brash]

Why not blame the player for an act of stupidity , Easy to blame the ref but it was a stupid foul to make in the first place and forced the ref to make the decisions . Queens Park would want the red if roles were reversed so there’s no argument for me decisions go against you and others do I personally think the red card actually went against the Rovers as Queens played far better with 10 men , Think your manager blew it with some of the substitutions taking your better players off 

Edited September 7, 2023 by basher brash

[mealsonwheels]

We won because we are GREAT! enough said.

[Zen Archer (Raconteur)]

On 27/08/2023 at 01:22, Zen Archer (Raconteur) said:

Predicting a QP trajectory of a Russian Moon shot for this season.

 

On 27/08/2023 at 07:28, spiders4ever said:

You're so kind. May your words come back to bite your behind.

 

That being said I reckon that this will be a difficult game for QP.

Thus far, my arse is intact.

[Zen Archer (Raconteur)]

Oh Hi.

On 27/08/2023 at 01:22, Zen Archer (Raconteur) said:

Predicting a QP trajectory of a Russian Moon shot for this season.

 

On 27/08/2023 at 07:28, spiders4ever said:

You're so kind. May your words come back to bite your behind.

 

That being said I reckon that this will be a difficult game for QP.