Tim Howard

[Khalekan]

Also there's no way an obstruction outside the area ever results in a red card, yellow and an an indirect freekick but never a red. It was a cock up no doubt but his quick thinking got him out of it and inept reffing saved him a booking.

Whilst that is true, Doug, my biggest gripe about that fiasco was that it looked like a handball to me so if the ref had made the same mistake as I did, he would have been off.

And who could have faulted the ref for thinking it was a handball?

As the pundits love to say, he gave the ref a "decision to make" and it could oh so easily have been the wrong one.

Not only that, time was running out and we needed the ball up the other end pronto to look for a winner.

Even if that ball had trickled into the box and he dived on it, he was only running the clock down and we were not winning.

 

[Khalekan]

I've been saying for years we should have a man on the post in that situation. Costs us loads of goals. Yesterday is another example.

Do you not think a top class goalkeeper should do away with a wall and bet himself to see the ball unimpeded as it comes in from thirty yards away?

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Whilst that is true, Doug, my biggest gripe about that fiasco was that it looked like a handball to me so if the ref had made the same mistake as I did, he would have been off.

And who could have faulted the ref for thinking it was a handball?

As the pundits love to say, he gave the ref a "decision to make" and it could oh so easily have been the wrong one.

Not only that, time was running out and we needed the ball up the other end pronto to look for a winner.

Even if that ball had trickled into the box and he dived on it, he was only running the clock down and we were not winning.

Not sure how anyone could see it as a handball when Howard dived starfish like on top of the ball, also the linesman had a clear unobstructed view of it. It's certainly wasn't text book and he should never have got himself into that position and he was lucky not to get booked but it was quick thinking and he somehow got himself out of the it.

 

[mrb85]

I've been saying for years we should have a man on the post in that situation. Costs us loads of goals. Yesterday is another example.

Agreed. It narrows the target by a couple of yards so why not. In the old days the reason you wouldn't was because it would play everyone onside, but given that an attacker can now if he wanted stand on his own in the 6 yd box without being called offside then that reason has disappeared.

 

[mrb85]

Do you not think a top class goalkeeper should do away with a wall and bet himself to see the ball unimpeded as it comes in from thirty yards away?

Just to digress, anyone else notice that that free kick should have been taken 30 yds out and not the 25 from where it was taken. Typically, none of our players thought to make sure the ball got placed where the trip took place.

 

[Joey66]

End of the Day Lee Mason should get demoted as a ref after that shocker of a performance!

 

[Dithering Dougie]

I've been saying for years we should have a man on the post in that situation. Costs us loads of goals. Yesterday is another example.

You do something like that and the opposition will have 2-3 players standing in front of Howard obstructing his view even more, it would be like some sort of football suicide.

 

[steken1]

Do you not think a top class goalkeeper should do away with a wall and bet himself to see the ball unimpeded as it comes in from thirty yards away?

No mate, it's not possible. An expert free kick taker will be all over that. we all knew where that free kick was going yesterday. A man on the post stops that.

 

[steken1]

You do something like that and the opposition will have 2-3 players standing in front of Howard obstructing his view even more, it would be like some sort of football suicide.

Two opposition players, a keeper and a man on the wall. It'd have to be some free kick to get past all them and into the goal.

 

[Joey66]

Do you not think a top class goalkeeper should do away with a wall and bet himself to see the ball unimpeded as it comes in from thirty yards away?

That wall had two big Sunderland players in the middle of it - TH forgot the basics he should have ordered two EFC players to stand behind them so if they moved { which they did} the would be cover for the two players that moved Goal keepers job to set up his wall of players so it was his fault by a mile!

 

[PaddyG]

What if there was no wall?

Not just for the Sunderland goal, just in general.

Sometimes makes it easier to score with the keeper standing on one side of the goal?

I can't help but always wonder what it would be like if the keeper just went, "Go on then, try and beat me" and stood in the middle of his goal.

 

[Azzurri]

What if there was no wall?

Not just for the Sunderland goal, just in general.

Sometimes makes it easier to score with the keeper standing on one side of the goal?

I can't help but always wonder what it would be like if the keeper just went, "Go on then, try and beat me" and stood in the middle of his goal.

I imagine the free kick taker would just belt it in to the top corner and laugh his head off at the keeper being an idiot.

 

[L4Everton]

Howard. What a situation, the Sunderland striker was very forgiving yesterday as Tim could and probably should have a few broken ribs right about now. He could easily have nudged the ball back into his area with his own feet to then pick it up couldn't he? Why rely on there being pace enough to get it there in the first place???? Insanity. To then lie on top of the ball with it only just touching the 18 yard line and rely on the perfect vision of all and sundry to spot really what was obstruction was foolhardy at best.

He should have seen red for a very similar incident at home vs Chelsea.

Such erratic play is odd, but two such episodes in such a short spell. Someone like Shearer would have booted him very very hard to move the ball from under him yesterday. Very hard indeed.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Two opposition players, a keeper and a man on the wall. It'd have to be some free kick to get past all them and into the goal.

Well clearly the opposition players will be trying to encourage the ball into the net and not preventing it from going in, or attempting to prevent the goalkeeper from saving it by obstructing his view.

There's a reason why this doesn't happen, because you'd be inviting unnecessary pressure onto your goalkeeper.

 

[steken1]

Well clearly the opposition players will be trying to encourage the ball into the net and not preventing it from going in, or attempting to prevent the goalkeeper from saving it by obstructing his view.

There's a reason why this doesn't happen, because you'd be inviting unnecessary pressure onto your goalkeeper.

Plenty of sides do this. As we've seen already a few times this season it's costing us goals. BTW the wall also impedes a keepers view. should we do away with that?