Port Vale v Exeter City Matchday Thread 29/9/2018

Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Messages
719
Via Twitter......



(rofl)
Nice to read for once. Beats all the fair play crap we have had to endure all these years.

Oh and for all the precious ones on here crying about the ref, we were doing the same as Lincoln, Wycombe and the rest that you all moan at so much. This time it bit us on the arse, next time it won't. Deal with it, it's football.
 

Avening Posse

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 31, 2013
Messages
8,343
Location
Sydney
I couldn't watch this game, but by all accounts on here we played very well against a decent side. Gutted the equaliser was so late, one of those things, but very encouraged by our start this season UTC
 

whiff

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2004
Messages
124
Location
the football league
Having had some time to breathe out here are my thoughts based on what I saw on iFollow. This was a cracking game to watch and, disappointing as the ending was, a draw was probably a fair result. I felt we rode our luck and if we had won the game it would have been a bit of a smash and grab raid. I didn't see the Lincoln game but thought Port Vale looked the best side I have seen play against us this season.

One slight worry is that we are struggling to keep clean sheets at the moment. Our defence all look good and seem to be playing well but we seem to have developed the knack of throwing in one slightly soft goal per game. The other area to work on is winning the ball in the midfield, When we had possession we looked dangerous and some of Nicky Law's passing was unbelievably good. However, we struggled to get him in the game enough, particularly in the second half. Tilly has played well recently but he didn't have his best game yesterday and seemed to be very worried about getting a second booking. The concern is that if he is struggling there is no natural replacement for him in the squad, although interestingly Dara O'Shea ended up in defensive midfield yesterday so that could be a position he could develop into.

Watching on tv the ref didn't seem to do too much wrong. A few marginal decisions went against us but he certainly didn't seem to be as much of a homer as the one from the Mansfield game. The convention with injury time seems to be add on whole minutes regardless of how much extra time there should be. Therefore adding on one extra minute for the subsitutions and other stoppages doesn't seem unreasonable. According to Antman the ball went out for the corner after 65 extra seconds had been played so that should have been the end of the game. However, at the end of the first half the ref allowed Vale to take a corner after the time should have been up and following that precedent he had to allow the final corner to be taken. (What was really bizarre is what happened after the goal. A Vale player was apparently injured in the celebration and the game was then held up while he was treated on the very edge of the pitch. Then, when presuambly the ref was going to blow for full time immediately after we had kicked off, he then added another two minutes for this stoppage and Nicky Law nearly scored a winner.)

And finally this was another good day for our Academy graduates. Storey started for Preston, Grimes played another 90 for Swansea, Collins was trusted to come on with half an hour left of a tight game, Hartridge was on the bench for, I think, the first time, and Jamie Reid scored a couple for Torquay.
 

PeteUSA

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
17,407
Location
Avondale (Near Phoenix) Arizona, USA.
Nice report whiff. As you say, it was a very good game on iFollow. Cutting to the referee "time debate", we were extremely unlucky with the way extra time played out, but there was nothing to suggest the referee 'manipulated' the clock. The added time board displays the 4th officials time accessment; the referee doesnt have to play to that. At the end of the day, the referee has the final say. As I said earlier, I thought the Pym stoppage was easily five minutes on its own, so to see only five minutes displayed on the board seemed a bit short to me; I assume the referee thought the same. It was hard on City, but we have to move on.
 

denzel

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
7,043
Location
The Travel Tavern
denzel, this is unlike you, getting heated at a situation. With all due respect to you and all the other City faithful that made that journey, an opinion couldnt have been arrived at because you were actually at the game. I think antman has the time that elapsed accounted for by stopping and starting the action on his computer and arriving at a valid reason why the amount of added time was applied by the referee. My take is that the referee ignored the five minute guideline he was shown and did his own timing; which he's perfectly in order to do. I did note that Pym was down for all of five minutes alone! So for just two and a bit extra added to that, I think it worked out correctly. That didnt stop the result being gut wrenchingly disappointing though.
Pete. It's the ref who decides how many minutes, so it was he who suggested five. You don't stop time when the ball goes out for a throw in or behind for a corner, the only reason to add time in injury time was the substitution.
It's ridiculous to compare our players to Lincoln and Wycombe. None of our players rolled over on the floor, the only stoppage to treat our player was Pym, with a head injury! I stand by my point that all our players did was what any team do when ahead. Taking their time over throws etc. But not excessive. To claim otherwise is quite insulting towards the players and Matty.
Yes I appreciate we are now more physical but refs are generally punishing us for that. It's when a game is extended for no reason that this must be questioned.
 
Last edited:

antman

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
6,848
Location
Barcelona
Of course the ref was right, because it proves Taylor isn’t as good as his predecessor
Oh my God. Sorry, it's me again.

Firstly, if you have a look at what I actually wrote, I say there is "a case" for adding on 1 min 5 secs, not that the ref was right to do this because many refs wouldn't.

Secondly, I have enjoyed the first ten games of this season more than the first ten of last season, and I am a big fan of Matt Taylor as a manager and have said so on various occasions.
 

PeteUSA

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
17,407
Location
Avondale (Near Phoenix) Arizona, USA.
Yes I appreciate we are now more physical but refs are generally punishing us for that. It's when a game is extended for no reason that this must be questioned.
By that last comment you're questioning the referees honesty I think. Matt T did say after the match that its a pity Port Vale equalised in the 7th minute of 5 minutes of added time, but he drew the line at that for fear of getting into trouble. This is obviously a genuine grievance so I would have thought the club (through the proper channels) would be in order to report the issue. The result wont get changed, but it would be nice to put the man on the spot if he truly deserves it. He clearly interpreted added time in a peculiar fashion. Perhaps the iFollow footage of the last 10 minutes could be used to prove a point? I suspect quite a few home fans will watch it over there today when the games re-run.
 

Leads

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2012
Messages
591
Location
SOUTH London
I'm not having that. They weren't time wasted. The ref did not speak to the players.

Still, what do I know I was only at the game. I shant bother going in future I'll just join the keyboard warriors watching at home.
I have disagreed with Antman in the past but he is completely right here. He has carefully rewatched the footage and explained in detail why the time was added. I’m not sure how this makes him a keyboard warrior?
 
Top