| Is that a reason you should always change taker? 20:45 - Dec 10 with 6426 views | FrimleyBlue |
Overthinking after his first? |  |
| |  |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:36 - Dec 10 with 1541 views | Cafe_Newman |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:25 - Dec 10 by StokieBlue |
When you can be bothered to respond on the vaccine thread then maybe I'll take an interest in what you say with regards to evidence based debate.
Until then, you're as pointless as Frimley.
SB |
You took 5 days to respond to me in that thread yet I didn't feel the need to insult you.
Your self-importance is quite tedious. |  | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:37 - Dec 10 with 1535 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:21 - Dec 10 by StokieBlue |
So the premise of the thread is impossible in your opinion?
I'm yet to see actual evidence of a team changing penalty takers in the highly pressurised situation of a world cup quarter final.
A Saturday match against Grimsby is different but I've not seen any evidence of that either.
Phil, can you clarify if asking for evidence is picking fights with other posters as blueas (serial offender) has implied?
SB |
Can't see you asking for evidence on the below
What is deemed decent? Where is the evidence to support the thread.
Radical suggestion going forward. by Mercian 10 Dec 2022 23:03 Rice plays CB. Alexander Arnold and Bellingham at centre mid with Foden in front of them. Saka at RW and get someone to kick Sancho's behind very hard and play him at LW.
Where are you on this one asking for the evidence to support such an idea. | |
| |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:42 - Dec 10 with 1529 views | PhilTWTD |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:21 - Dec 10 by StokieBlue |
So the premise of the thread is impossible in your opinion?
I'm yet to see actual evidence of a team changing penalty takers in the highly pressurised situation of a world cup quarter final.
A Saturday match against Grimsby is different but I've not seen any evidence of that either.
Phil, can you clarify if asking for evidence is picking fights with other posters as blueas (serial offender) has implied?
SB |
I really don't see the issue with the discussion, it's an obvious topic given what happened, even if I believe - and anyone is entitled to disagree with me - that it would have been an impossible call in the particular set of circumstances. But it's not such a ludicrous suggestion that someone else should take a second kick.
I had a look to see if I could find something about Wenger saying he wouldn't want players taking a second kick as I've a vague recollection of that and instead found something where he was asked whether Kane should have taken both kicks this evening, which illustrates that it's a wider topic of discussion rather than anything particularly quirky from Frimley.
https://metro.co.uk/2022/12/10/arsene-wenger-speaks-out-on-england-letting-harry |  | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:46 - Dec 10 with 1511 views | chicoazul |
If you had to pick someone to take that penalty, that specific penalty in the 85th minute of a World Cup QF for England, you would pick Kane. Just one of those things. |  |
| |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:54 - Dec 10 with 1480 views | clive_baker |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:42 - Dec 10 by PhilTWTD |
I really don't see the issue with the discussion, it's an obvious topic given what happened, even if I believe - and anyone is entitled to disagree with me - that it would have been an impossible call in the particular set of circumstances. But it's not such a ludicrous suggestion that someone else should take a second kick.
I had a look to see if I could find something about Wenger saying he wouldn't want players taking a second kick as I've a vague recollection of that and instead found something where he was asked whether Kane should have taken both kicks this evening, which illustrates that it's a wider topic of discussion rather than anything particularly quirky from Frimley.
https://metro.co.uk/2022/12/10/arsene-wenger-speaks-out-on-england-letting-harry |
I think it’s a moot point because if we stop the clock as the ref points to the penalty spot for the 2nd time this isn’t really a topic that would warrant much discussion. Kane is our regular penalty taker, one of the best in world football and has just rifled one in the top corner 20 minutes earlier. There wasn’t really a question to be asked around who was taking it in this instance. The narrative is purely driven by the outcome, which of course was information that didn’t exist at the time of that decision. We can all speculate after the event and there’s no harm in it, but had Kane picked the ball up and handed it to Rashford we would all be scratching our head as to why he wasn’t taking it. |  |
| |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:57 - Dec 10 with 1471 views | Vegtablue |
I disagree wholeheartedly. I heard some on 606 suggest Sterling or Mount should have stepped up instead! Incredible comments.
Our attacking players on the pitch had a wealth of experience missing huge penalties for club and country. It would have been a monumental ask for any of them to have stepped up instead. Not only would they have been confronted by perhaps the most pressurized moment of their lives, but they would be doing so with the knowledge that their best penalty taker in the team had already scored one. Had they missed the recriminations would have been off the charts.
Why did our best penalty taker not take the most important penalty of our tournament? Why did the captain shirk a captain's moment? Lest we forget a player who carried the confidence of already bettering Lloris earlier and who has a better understanding of his opponent than anyone else on the pitch. Lest we forget a player who stepped up with two penalties against Colombia and in countless other highly pressurized moments from the spot for club and country.
I honestly can't see a case for anyone else even reaching the back of the minds of my fellow England fans. No, he just missed it |  | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:58 - Dec 10 with 1458 views | StokieBlue |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:42 - Dec 10 by PhilTWTD |
I really don't see the issue with the discussion, it's an obvious topic given what happened, even if I believe - and anyone is entitled to disagree with me - that it would have been an impossible call in the particular set of circumstances. But it's not such a ludicrous suggestion that someone else should take a second kick.
I had a look to see if I could find something about Wenger saying he wouldn't want players taking a second kick as I've a vague recollection of that and instead found something where he was asked whether Kane should have taken both kicks this evening, which illustrates that it's a wider topic of discussion rather than anything particularly quirky from Frimley.
https://metro.co.uk/2022/12/10/arsene-wenger-speaks-out-on-england-letting-harry |
But if you put forward a point of view as something that should have happened or been discussed then you should have examples and evidence to support that.
He's got none and to be honest yours is a very hard to find example. He stated it as if it was something that was normally considered but the evidence is seems clear that in general teams don't change penalty takers if they have scored.
Chico and I agree on virtually nothing but even he agrees there is nothing to see here.
SB |  | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:01 - Dec 11 with 1446 views | LankHenners |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:54 - Dec 10 by clive_baker |
I think it’s a moot point because if we stop the clock as the ref points to the penalty spot for the 2nd time this isn’t really a topic that would warrant much discussion. Kane is our regular penalty taker, one of the best in world football and has just rifled one in the top corner 20 minutes earlier. There wasn’t really a question to be asked around who was taking it in this instance. The narrative is purely driven by the outcome, which of course was information that didn’t exist at the time of that decision. We can all speculate after the event and there’s no harm in it, but had Kane picked the ball up and handed it to Rashford we would all be scratching our head as to why he wasn’t taking it. |
Think it's a small part of a wider discussion in football discourse, i.e. everyone's an expert after the event. As you say it doesn't mean there's no point running through the different ways something might have turned out if xyz happened instead of abc but at times there's an inability to differentiate between a bad call and a fine call that just didn't work out. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:05 - Dec 11 with 1426 views | StokieBlue |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:36 - Dec 10 by Cafe_Newman |
You took 5 days to respond to me in that thread yet I didn't feel the need to insult you.
Your self-importance is quite tedious. |
I didn't feel the need to dig you out in the meantime though did I.
Certain HP vibe going on here.
SB | | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:06 - Dec 11 with 1418 views | PhilTWTD |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:58 - Dec 10 by StokieBlue |
But if you put forward a point of view as something that should have happened or been discussed then you should have examples and evidence to support that.
He's got none and to be honest yours is a very hard to find example. He stated it as if it was something that was normally considered but the evidence is seems clear that in general teams don't change penalty takers if they have scored.
Chico and I agree on virtually nothing but even he agrees there is nothing to see here.
SB |
In general they don't, but it does happen. Even if, as I think, it was a decision which wouldn't have been made in these circumstances given Kane's stature and record from the spot, the fact that he missed puts the question of whether it might be wise to consider changing take on the table for discussion. | | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:10 - Dec 11 with 1394 views | PhilTWTD |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:54 - Dec 10 by clive_baker |
I think it’s a moot point because if we stop the clock as the ref points to the penalty spot for the 2nd time this isn’t really a topic that would warrant much discussion. Kane is our regular penalty taker, one of the best in world football and has just rifled one in the top corner 20 minutes earlier. There wasn’t really a question to be asked around who was taking it in this instance. The narrative is purely driven by the outcome, which of course was information that didn’t exist at the time of that decision. We can all speculate after the event and there’s no harm in it, but had Kane picked the ball up and handed it to Rashford we would all be scratching our head as to why he wasn’t taking it. |
Indeed, agree with that, but what happened does lead to a wider question - is it wise for a player to take a second penalty in the same game? It's a fair discussion. I think Warky once missed a second penalty in a game, incidentally. | | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:10 - Dec 11 with 1391 views | Ryorry |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:58 - Dec 10 by StokieBlue |
But if you put forward a point of view as something that should have happened or been discussed then you should have examples and evidence to support that.
He's got none and to be honest yours is a very hard to find example. He stated it as if it was something that was normally considered but the evidence is seems clear that in general teams don't change penalty takers if they have scored.
Chico and I agree on virtually nothing but even he agrees there is nothing to see here.
SB |
So your opinion is that football isn't a "game of opinions" then?
"Football is a game of opinions, and some people have a great opinion of me, and some people probably think I'm absolutely useless".
Joe Hart
Edited for accuracy of quote & attribution [Post edited 11 Dec 2022 1:34]
|  |
| |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:11 - Dec 11 with 1387 views | StokieBlue |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:06 - Dec 11 by PhilTWTD |
In general they don't, but it does happen. Even if, as I think, it was a decision which wouldn't have been made in these circumstances given Kane's stature and record from the spot, the fact that he missed puts the question of whether it might be wise to consider changing take on the table for discussion. |
Only because he missed.
This thread wouldn't exist if he scored because the premise of it is strange.
It's the eagerness to point out the flaws in other people's decision making after the fact that is annoying. Make the statement before the event if you feel that strongly rather than waiting until something happens like a bottom feeding organism waiting to suck on other peoples misery.
SB | | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:17 - Dec 11 with 1367 views | PhilTWTD |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:11 - Dec 11 by StokieBlue |
Only because he missed.
This thread wouldn't exist if he scored because the premise of it is strange.
It's the eagerness to point out the flaws in other people's decision making after the fact that is annoying. Make the statement before the event if you feel that strongly rather than waiting until something happens like a bottom feeding organism waiting to suck on other peoples misery.
SB |
Actually, while I agree with you re the thread (although if he'd scored it might still have been one relating to second penalties), I can't have been the only one concerned that the first penalty would have an impact on Kane taking the second penalty while we were waiting for him to take it. | | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:19 - Dec 11 with 1352 views | XYZ |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 23:46 - Dec 10 by chicoazul |
If you had to pick someone to take that penalty, that specific penalty in the 85th minute of a World Cup QF for England, you would pick Kane. Just one of those things. |
The grown up Chico gets an outing | | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:21 - Dec 11 with 1352 views | Cafe_Newman |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:05 - Dec 11 by StokieBlue |
I didn't feel the need to dig you out in the meantime though did I.
Certain HP vibe going on here.
SB |
It's a football forum and a fellow Town fan has asked a question people all over the country have probably asked this evening.
You've said that he shouldn't even be asking the question without evidence. Really!?
I didn't dig you out so much as you held yourself up for a bit of harmless teasing.
But you don't do playful. You're all about downvotes, trying to out other Town fans as previous posters and generally policing what others say.
This is a great forum and most of us come here to have some fun, not to surveil every thread for non-evidence based comment.
Lighten up mate, please. We're all town fans. [Post edited 11 Dec 2022 0:44]
| | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:58 - Dec 11 with 1323 views | FrimleyBlue |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:11 - Dec 11 by StokieBlue |
Only because he missed.
This thread wouldn't exist if he scored because the premise of it is strange.
It's the eagerness to point out the flaws in other people's decision making after the fact that is annoying. Make the statement before the event if you feel that strongly rather than waiting until something happens like a bottom feeding organism waiting to suck on other peoples misery.
SB |
Breaking news. Something happened in football which resulted in a discussion being held about the something that happened.
You seriously have to question what on earth you think this place is for. | |
| |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 01:40 - Dec 11 with 1304 views | Skip_Intro |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 22:21 - Dec 10 by StokieBlue |
One day you'll not analyse something to within an inch of it's life.
How tiring it must be to be you. I sympathise.
SB |
exactly this...have a day off ffs and spare us your inane ramblings...you just don't need to post every single thing you think on social media you dull **** |  | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 06:20 - Dec 11 with 1264 views | tractordownsouth |
Kane had 2 penalties in the last World Cup against Panama and put them both in the left corner, which was what he tried to do today. Lloris went the right way for the one he missed; I think it would’ve been saved anyway. |  |
| |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 07:15 - Dec 11 with 1254 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:11 - Dec 11 by StokieBlue |
Only because he missed.
This thread wouldn't exist if he scored because the premise of it is strange.
It's the eagerness to point out the flaws in other people's decision making after the fact that is annoying. Make the statement before the event if you feel that strongly rather than waiting until something happens like a bottom feeding organism waiting to suck on other peoples misery.
SB |
I can’t help but think that if anyone else had started this thread we would still be on page one. Football is a game of emotions, passion and opinions. If we try to reduce it to a science then we may as well replace the players with robots and the forum with computer generated replies.
I doubt know why you don’t just put frimley on ignore. |  |
| |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 07:21 - Dec 11 with 1246 views | StokieBlue |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 07:15 - Dec 11 by GlasgowBlue |
I can’t help but think that if anyone else had started this thread we would still be on page one. Football is a game of emotions, passion and opinions. If we try to reduce it to a science then we may as well replace the players with robots and the forum with computer generated replies.
I doubt know why you don’t just put frimley on ignore. |
I've taken your advice.
He's now on ignore.
The fact is he could have kept it a one page by just providing the examples requested, is it wrong to ask people to back things up nowadays? It's not like I'm the only one on the thread saying he does this.
Anyway, he's on ignore, everyone is happy.
SB [Post edited 11 Dec 2022 7:22]
| | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 07:59 - Dec 11 with 1213 views | Churchman |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 22:50 - Dec 10 by PhilTWTD |
It's not that unusual for teams to change their penalty taker if they have two kicks in the same game. I seem to remember a manager insisting upon it, might have been Wenger. But I think it would have been impossible to take it off Kane in this instance, there would have been too much pressure on whoever had taken it instead and hell to pay if he'd missed it.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
And these are the key points. Add in that in shootouts players who are penalty takers often take the first for good reason even if they’ve scored from one during the game (eg Messi).
I would add that the ancients on here will remember John Wark taking penalties. He must have missed the odd one, but he was as good as anyone (Ray Stewart of WHU was another). I don’t remember us having two in a game that he played in but as sure as night follows day, he’d have taken them both. [Post edited 11 Dec 2022 8:00]
|  | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 09:37 - Dec 11 with 1163 views | PJH |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 07:59 - Dec 11 by Churchman |
And these are the key points. Add in that in shootouts players who are penalty takers often take the first for good reason even if they’ve scored from one during the game (eg Messi).
I would add that the ancients on here will remember John Wark taking penalties. He must have missed the odd one, but he was as good as anyone (Ray Stewart of WHU was another). I don’t remember us having two in a game that he played in but as sure as night follows day, he’d have taken them both. [Post edited 11 Dec 2022 8:00]
|
Warkie scored three in a game against Aris Salonika, doubt if there was any discussion as to whether he should take the second or third one. |  | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 16:07 - Dec 11 with 1082 views | Cafe_Newman |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 00:05 - Dec 11 by StokieBlue |
I didn't feel the need to dig you out in the meantime though did I.
Certain HP vibe going on here.
SB |
Who is HP?
Can anyone help? | | | |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 16:19 - Dec 11 with 1140 views | Ryorry |
| Is that a reason you should always change taker? on 16:07 - Dec 11 by Cafe_Newman |
Who is HP?
Can anyone help? |
Dunno, but I did wonder if this thread was going to make it onto 'MotD World Cup Top Ten Controversies' this afty on BBC1 
(14.30 iirc for those wanting to watch on iPlayer). | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
