sne Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 When was the last time we actually won under Phil Dowd? Against Bolton 2011 away. Since that he's been in charge Arsenal where we lost 3-0, drew with Norwich, 8-0 loss to Chelsea and drew with Fulham at home. No doubt Dowd is a joke, but im guessing our record from the last couple of seasons is pretty much the same regardless of who the ref was. Mostly losses and draws with the odd win thrown in. In our last 83 PL games we've won 20... Pleasingly enough 3 of those wins have come this season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Technically we last won with him as referee in the Bradford second leg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 AVB thinks Benteke he will start for us on Sunday. Mainly because of comments from Dembele and Vertonghen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) Help me Obi-Wan Benteke, your my only hope Edited October 18, 2013 by sne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avflife Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) & made the winner against Man City. I've read this twice. Kozak did not touch the ball for the winner against city. So a player has to touch the ball to be involved? Did he just stay on the ground while Kompany went up by himself? Perhaps 'made the winner' is too strong, but without Kozak's challenge in the air, the ball doesn't run through to Andi. I've read he made the goal and someone else credited him with an assist for the winner. I never said he didn't help but he didn't touch the ball. You've even agreed it's too strong. Kozak didn't do anything for the winner against City, Guzan's long-ball was missed by everyone, Hart wandering into no-man's land and was subsequently at blame for Weimann's easy finish. Read, have you even watched the highlights of the match, if you weren't able to attend Benteke should start no doubt on Sunday, Kozak hasn't done badly, but he isn't no Benteke is he now. Edited October 18, 2013 by Avflife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 & made the winner against Man City. I've read this twice. Kozak did not touch the ball for the winner against city. So a player has to touch the ball to be involved? Did he just stay on the ground while Kompany went up by himself? Perhaps 'made the winner' is too strong, but without Kozak's challenge in the air, the ball doesn't run through to Andi. I've read he made the goal and someone else credited him with an assist for the winner. I never said he didn't help but he didn't touch the ball. You've even agreed it's too strong. Kozak didn't do anything for the winner against City, Guzan's long-ball was missed by everyone, Hart wandering into no-man's land and was subsequently at blame for Weimann's easy finish. Read, have you even watched the highlights of the match, if you weren't able to attend Benteke should start no doubt on Sunday, Kozak hasn't done badly, but he isn't no Benteke is he now. Didn't do anything is a bit harsh, granted he never got a touch, but he caused the confusion between two defenders, when Guzan launched the ball Kozak and Nastacic are heading away, he then reads the ball before Nastacic, Kompany then is in no mans land as he doesn't know whether to follow Kozak or stay with Weimann. If he never judged the flight of the ball before Nastacic that goal would never have happened.Gary Neville did analysis of it on the MNF and stated the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) I find it amazing that there are people who have the opinion that Kozak had nothing to do with the wining goal. Jesus christ are you blind?? it's so obvious it's embarrassing to think otherwise. Edited October 18, 2013 by villan_007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chappy Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Don't mince your words! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 & made the winner against Man City. Kozak didn't do anything for the winner against City The truth is most likely somewhere between these 2 statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Folski Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Against Bolton 2011 away. Since that he's been in charge Arsenal where we lost 3-0, drew with Norwich, 8-0 loss to Chelsea and drew with Fulham at home. That Delph own goal was a sickener, though we might be doomed at that stage. Fulham didn't even have a shot on target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted October 18, 2013 Moderator Share Posted October 18, 2013 If he hadn't been where he was, one of the Citeh defenders would've been able to track the trajectory of the ball and easily intercept it. Kozak made the winner by being there and by completely fooling the defenders. It worked like a dummy and it was essential to getting the ball past them to Weimann. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Maybe it's the wording but I just can't agree that he made the winner. He challenged, like he should have done, and that caused problems but he didn't create anything. I still don!'to see how anyone can claim he set up a goal in that game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 What you need to think about is 'if Kozak wasn't there, would the ball have got through to Weimann?' It's not as simplistic as 'he got a touch so he made the goal' or 'he didn't get a touch so he didn't do anything'. Football rarely is that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Maybe it's the wording but I just can't agree that he made the winner. He challenged, like he should have done, and that caused problems but he didn't create anything. I still don!'to see how anyone can claim he set up a goal in that game. I'm stunned by this, how on earth you can say that baffles me. As above if he does'nt go for the ball the defenders win the ball. Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted October 18, 2013 Moderator Share Posted October 18, 2013 What you need to think about is 'if Kozak wasn't there, would the ball have got through to Weimann?'That's exactly it. Watch the through ball and remove Kozak from the equation and tell me neither defender would've simply intercepted the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 So challenging for a ball and not winning it is now creating a goal? If it's an intentional dummy I could agree but it's not. And the whole remove him from the equation thing is ridiculous. Next time we score from a corner are we going to credit the 3 or 4 players standing in the box with creating the goal? I wonder how much credit bent or Heskey would have got for the same thing. Maybe it's the wording but I just can't agree that he made the winner. He challenged, like he should have done, and that caused problems but he didn't create anything. I still don!'to see how anyone can claim he set up a goal in that game. I'm stunned by this, how on earth you can say that baffles me. As above if he does'nt go for the ball the defenders win the ball. Simple. His challenge and run helped. But it's not an assist or something that can be credited with creating the goal IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) So challenging for a ball and not winning it is now creating a goal? If it's an intentional dummy I could agree but it's not. And the whole remove him from the equation thing is ridiculous. Next time we score from a corner are we going to credit the 3 or 4 players standing in the box with creating the goal? I wonder how much credit bent or Heskey would have got for the same thing. Maybe it's the wording but I just can't agree that he made the winner. He challenged, like he should have done, and that caused problems but he didn't create anything. I still don!'to see how anyone can claim he set up a goal in that game. I'm stunned by this, how on earth you can say that baffles me. As above if he does'nt go for the ball the defenders win the ball. Simple. His challenge and run helped. But it's not an assist or something that can be credited with creating the goal IMO. You're totally deluded mate, I'm sorry the corner comparison is bat shit and has nothing to do with this goal. There were 4 players involved, if Kozak doesn't jump and kick his leg out to try and get to the ball then Kompany heads it clear with no chance of Weimann getting to it. It isn't an assist but without kozak it isn't a goal. It's so obvious I can only think you are trolling. Edited October 18, 2013 by villan_007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 The funny thing is if Kozak actually got a touch onto it, Weimann either would have been offside or the ball would have got through to Hart but it didn't. But to say he had no influence on that goal happening is rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 The best view of the goal is when Gary Neville showed Kozak's original run, he took Nastacic one way and then read the flight of the ball and the rest as we say is history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 The best view of the goal is when Gary Neville showed Kozak's original run, he took Nastacic one way and then read the flight of the ball and the rest as we say is history. Forgot that also, when Neville gets the videos out then the proof is solid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts