Well, the first thing I’d like to say about today’s 2-2 draw at Cardiff City Stadium against Brentford is that I thought it was one of the most entertaining Cardiff matches of the season. Yes, okay, I could qualify that statement with something along the lines of “not that it had much to beat”, but chawrae teg and all that, it was a match played in horrible windy conditions with regular heavy downpours of hail and or rain between two sides who approached it just as they should have – they both really needed a win and they both went for it.
I say that mind, but it’s not quite true – City were passive, if not downright negative, in what was yet another poor start in this season of poor starts and conceded the first goal for the fourth home league match on the trot. This one was not from the first corner we had to defend like the ones against Wigan and Stoke, it was from the second, but it all gives more evidence to those who berate our concentration levels early in games and, for such a big side, we are alarmingly susceptible at corners.
Still City had little in the way of a positive response and a second Brentford goal soon arrived – it was only after a scuffle in front of both benches and the fourth official around the half an hour mark that got the fans going and seemed to fire up the players that we shook the visitors out of their unhurried control of proceedings.
That incident I mentioned earlier was the first in what were many which thrust referee Simon Hooper into the spotlight. Mr Hooper was, far and away, the main topic of conversation with the Cardiff fans who rang Radio Wales’ Rob Phillips phone in tonight and I think it’s fair to report that very little of what was said about the official was complimentary!
Conversation on the phone in tended to centre on three incidents where it was generally felt that Mr Hooper had got things wrong by making no decision, but I’m afraid I’m going to have to come over all Arsene Wenger here and say that I didn’t have a good view of two of them and wasn’t even aware of the third one happening!
In fact, I came out of the game thinking that Mr Hooper and his assistants were the latest in a growing list of poor performances from the men, and women, in charge which saw us coming off a lot worse than our opponents. John Brooks was very poor I thought in the Wigan game and his assistant on the Grandstand side of the ground had a shocker, Steve Martin was only a little better in Tuesday’s game with Nottingham Forest and now we have Simon Hooper with an assistant on the Ninian Stand side who got what was an obvious throw in decision wrong as well as giving Brentford the benefit of the doubt in the first half in a series of offside claims.
I was convinced we had got next to nothing from the referee and his linesmen today, but it seems I may have been wrong on that score if some of the opinions expressed on the phone in were correct.
Getting down to specifics, the incident that I referred to earlier which led to Brentford Head Coach Thomas Frank being warned by the referee was, apparently, sparked by a Will Vaulks challenge on Brentford’s Christian Noorgard that saw the City man allegedly leading with his knee when making contact with the visiting player’s back.
Rob Phillips and one or two callers were of the view that Vaulks was lucky to stay on the pitch as the referee, on the advice of the fourth official it seems, decided not even to administer a yellow card.
I can’t comment on this decision because I was on the wrong side of the ground and basically didn’t have a clue as to what had happened. When it came to the penalty appeal at my end of the ground, there were a lot of bodies between me and the ball as a Vaulks long throw came into the box, but I saw Sean Morrison go down heavily as he tried to jump up – it looked like a penalty to me, but I’ve become reconciled to the fact that we only get about one in ten given in incidents like this involving our skipper.
However, it was what then happened that got the pundits criticizing Mr Hooper – unfortunately, my view was obscured for what was an absolute stone waller of a penalty according to Jason Perry and Ivan Roberts when Junior Hoilett was brought down a few seconds later.
Roberts also stated his belief that Brentford were denied a clear penalty when Morrison handled inside his own area, but this was news to me as I had been completely unaware of any such appeal at the time.
Besides those three incidents, there was one more that provoked a discussion between pundits and callers and that was when Callum Paterson jumped for a header with Brentford keeper Raya. Paterson was looking only at the ball as he managed to get above the goalkeeper to win the header, yet he was penalised!
An exasperated Roberts gave his opinion on the phone in saying it’s just not worth forwards jumping for the ball with goalkeepers these days because they’ll nearly always be penalised. Similarly, there was an inevitability about what happened when Paterson chased a through pass as Raya advanced.
The pair slid for the ball on the wet surface and Paterson appeared to have gained possession only for Mr Hooper to award a free kick to Brentford as their goalkeeper rolled around in “agony” caused by I know not what – again, the goalkeeper being protected when he shouldn’t have been.
For me, both of these decisions went to exactly why I felt like I did on the final whistle. The BBC’s match stats say that we committed fourteen fouls to Brentford’s six, many of those fourteen were dubious in my opinion and, just as in the Wigan and Forest matches, I had the feeling that the referee was not being even handed in his decision making.
Furthermore, based on our last three home league matches, I have a feeling that Paterson is becoming something of a marked man with officials. The man City keep on returning to play centre forward for them has a couple of habits which I do not feel do him any favours when it comes to match officials in that he goes to ground very easily when challenged by an opponent and also that he has a habit of “letting the opposition know he’s around” with a series of niggly, late, challenges on defenders just after they’ve cleared the ball.
Such things are hardly designed to maim or seriously injure anyone, but I’m sure referees notice and remember these things and Paterson suffers accordingly.
There’s a lot more I could write about today’s officials, but I won’t at this stage, I’ll just close by making a few observations about the reaction both online and in the mainstream media to Simon Hooper. First, I cannot go along with the theory that he is a part of some anti Welsh element among the refereeing community that is deliberately making decisions against us and Swansea.
Secondly, the line expressed by a few people online that Hooper has some sort of personal agenda against us seems very far fetched to me. A penalty not awarded against Watford in a game we lost 5-1 is the proof offered by those who stick to the view this one official has it in for us, but when you consider our overall record in games Simon Hooper has reffed us in, it seems pretty unlikely.
Today was the thirteenth time Mr Hooper has done one of our matches and, as of this evening, our record reads won seven, drawn four and lost two – as someone who generally tends to favour the cock up explanation over the conspiracy one in all walks of life, I just think he is one of a few officials we’ve had lately who had “a bad day at the office”.
Back to the game, I’d say Brentford are perhaps my second favourite Championship team because I like the way they play, admire their recruitment policy and we always seem to have good games against them, but I must admit I was a little disappointed by them today.
For me, the reasons why we were able to come back from 2-0 down to get a point were almost as much down to them as us. Having benefited from a goal scrappily conceded by us from a corner very early on and then a free kick cheaply and needlessly given away by Junior Hoilett which made the score 2-0, they tended to wait for things to happen rather than pursue the clinching goal.
The visitors, if anything, played better in the second half, as they largely controlled the game and carried more of a cutting edge, but, Alex.Smithies, unfairly blamed by some for being beaten by Mbeomo’s excellent free kick I thought, made some good saves when called upon and although we wasted many counter attack opportunities with the careless and clumsy passing which has been a bane of our season, we still troubled Brentford a lot when we broke.
Indeed, it was Joe Bennett who had the best chance of the second period when he did very well to get so far forward to get into a position where he was unmarked in front of goal some five yards out and then not quite as well to knock the ball wide.
I’m not really convinced by a three man midfield of Vaulks, Joe Ralls and Leandro Bacuna because they seem too similar in style to me, but they did give us more energy. In some ways, we were like a lower league side giving a good account of themselves in a cup tie against a Premier League side because Brentford were much the more accomplished team when it came to ball retention and creativity.
However, from somewhere, we conjured up a lovely goal on thirty four minutes when we worked the ball patiently down the right and Albert Adomah was able to put over the best cross by a City player in our two home matches this week which Hoilett managed to nod in from eight yards out.
Our equaliser just over ten minutes later was not as easy on the eye, but it did offer further proof that Vaulks’ long throw is much more effective than anyone else’s at the club. Perhaps it’s something to do with the trajectory, or maybe it’s down to the pace he gets on the ball, but I make it that five of our last seven home league goals have come from them. This one was quite simple as Morrison back headed to the far post where Ralls got ahead of his marker to show again that he is, by some way, our,most likely goal scorer from central midfield by netting with a close range header.
Although it does grate with me somewhat that, as a team that has spent more on transfer fees than the large majority of clubs in this division over the past three seasons, we still look less proficient technically than virtually every side we play – I’m afraid that’s what comes of having a previous manager for whom sophistication meant having a slice of lemon with your cod and chips. This is a squad put together very much in Neil Warnock’s image, but today offered a tiny glimpse of what we saw in 17/18 that proved this isn’t altogether a bad thing.
It was postponements all the way apart from that with the Academy team’s match at Charlton, Blaenrhondda’s home cup tie with Cefn Cribbwr and Ton Pentre’s home league match with Risca all falling victim to this weekend’s named storm – it was Jorge this time, but I have not had confirmation yet as to what next weekend’s is named.
Once again, can I make a request for support from readers by them becoming my Patrons through Patreon. Full details of this scheme and the reasons why I decided to introduce it can be found here, but I should say that the feedback I have got so far has indicated a reluctance from some to use Patreon as they prefer to opt for a direct payment to me. If you are interested in becoming a patron and would prefer to make a direct contribution, please contact me at paul.evans8153@hotmail.com or in the Feedback section of the blog and I will send you my bank/PayPal details.
Good morning, Blogmeister.
Your report as always is of the highest quality — accurate, informative, and with an amusing turn of phrase. To describe Sophistication as “a slice of lemon with your cod and chips” is brilliant. And in your previous report I was equally amused by your description of Paterson’s “highly unorthodox interpretation of the modern day number ten role.”
As for Paterson, or should that be Battersome, I was greatly impressed by his performance, and in particular by his numerous backward headers which were crying out for a colleague to run on to. In fact, I think they were tailor-made for Glatzel, so I was disappointed that he had to spend the whole game warming the bench.
On the subject of backward headers, I have been calling out for a long time for them to be aimed at the near post on occasions to allow for Morrison or whoever to back-head the ball, as happened yesterday.
To come back to Paterson, I have a theory (tongue in cheek) why our players showed such energy and grit — having seen Paterson grip one of his colleagues at the end of two recent games, no-one wanted to be a third! At any rate there were shades of the great Trevor Ford in his play (as far as modern rulings allow it) and I commend him for that. In addition, praise ,too, for our new tight back , who also did well with his defending and his willingness to storm forward.
As you say, Paul, it was an entertaining game under horrendous conditions, but am I being too optimistic when I say it augurs well for the future?
Thanks for the report once again, Paul.
Due to health issues and the corona-virus I am confined to barracks indefinitely. So obviously I wasn’t at the game yesterday but I did manage to watch the second half online.
It’s becoming a continuing theme of our games recently that the game officials are the main topic of conversation. I think yesterday’s officials might be the worst of the lot. As fans we are bound to be one-eyed but yesterday’s foul count 14 to 6 says a lot.
We are still a long way from being a good team but there are signs that perhaps we will be seeing something better in the not too distant future. We are still in desperate need of a striker. Paterson has plenty of energy and enthusiasm but lacks quality.
I am aware that Marlon Pack isn’t flavour of the month with a lot of our fans but he can see a pass that our other midfielders can’t, with Faulks and Ralls either side of him perhaps we would have a little creativity.
Keep up the good work, Paul, I am going to be even more dependent on your honest reports.
Hi Paul,
Re ‘the cock up explanation over the conspiracy one’ – I recently learned that this is called Hanlon’s razor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
Simon
Paul…I haven’t contributed much recently – put it down to mediocrity-fatigue – but your articulate and generous-spirited reports continue to provide me with an information and opinion lifeline out here in the far east (Anglia).
At a pub quiz the other evening, I (and I assume many Ipswich supporters) was interested to learn that Norwich’s original (founding) colours were blue-and-white.
Best wishes to all, and particularly Colin in his monkish state,
Paul and everyone – I have always believed at the impartiality of referees, linesmen (I refuse to call them assistant referees) and fourth official, and still do. But as for their competence, now that really is something else. I have been watching the City since September 1951 and I cannot recall ever, ever, raising my voice and shouting, as I did in the second half, at the referee “referee,get a grip “. As others have stated, he was awful.
That both Managers felt aggrieved at his decision making was indicative of his performance. If they are asked to submit an account of his display to the powers that be, I hope they will not hold back. If it is possible to demote someone, then Mr.Hooper should next make an appearance at the 5th division of the Western League in a match between St.Ives Reserves and Padstow Athletic, or similar.
As for the game itself – oh Mr.Bennett!!!.
Thank you all for your comments. Anthony, I agree Paterson is a good header of the ball and, in my opinion, is more capable of winning the traditional high ball to the target man type challenges than anyone else we’ve got up front (I include Gary Madine in that as well). This raises a couple of questions in my mind, first, why don’t we make more use of him from set pieces, rather than aim for Morrison all the time? Morrison can still be effective from free kicks, corners and throw in’s as he showed on Saturday, but his goals have dried up in the last two seasons and I think sides are handling him better these days (through fair means and foul!). Aiming for someone else occasionally would make the opposition think more as to how they countered our set piece game and may have a side effect in that it would free up Morrison a little to be more effective as well.
My second question relates to your comment about Glatzel – I agree that he, or Ward, could have profited from some of Paterson’s flick on’s, but we seem to be very reluctant to play with two up front through the middle. I can understand this in some ways because, if we kept two wingers, it means we would have to play with two central midfielders and I don’t think we are good enough in this area to do that. So, if we want to keep four at the back, have more bodies in the middle of the park and two up top, at least one of the wingers has to go. This would be my preference based on the performance of our wingers this season, but we could keep the width with a three centrabacks and wing back formation (by the way, I’d like to see how Paterson would get on as a right wing back), but the obvious drawback with this is that our performances when we have used three centrebacks generally haven’t been good – I think the last time we used that system was at QPR!
Colin, sad to hear about your health issues and I hope it won’t be long before you are able to resume coming to games – I tend to agree with your comments about Pack, but I appreciate that, in the same sort of way it did with Whitts in his latter seasons with us, having him as one of a central midfield two puts a huge physical burden on the other player involved, but, with three in there, Pack could be accommodated.
Simon, great to see you on here and thanks for proving that the Feedback section has more than just football chat to recommend it – I think I’ll use “Hanlon’s razor” on the Politics messageboard on Mike’s site to confuse one or two “know alls”!
Thanks, also to Lindsay for providing something that I wasn’t aware of (i.e. Norwich’s original colours) and in return, I ask did you know about “The Nest” (see question number 58 in this quiz from a few years back)?
https://mauveandyellowarmy.net/the-great-60th-birthday-quiz/
BJA, thinking about it from a distance of a few days, Simon Hooper, and the linesman on the Ninian Stand side, were really hopeless weren’t they – as you say, both teams had good reason to be critical of the officials and it reinforced my opinion that Premier League referees think they are “slumming it” when they have to go back to the Football League to do a game – Jason Perry made a good point about how such officials might be struggling without VAR to bale them out when they do games below Premier League level.
Paul
I’m surprised that you haven’t picked up on other moments that we “got away with” on Saturday, with ref Hooper and his cohorts failing to see the foul throws executed by Vaulks.
My mate & I regularly notice increasingly, in our games, that the officials seem to turning an apparent blind eye, lol, to foul throws and Saturday was no exception. If you watch back the highlights of the Brentford game, at least two of Vaulks’s long throws, saw one of his feet clearly off the ground. This happened right in front of the same linesman and twice he failed to pick up on it. On one of these foul throws we scored – this was the one headed in by Ralls. We were lucky to get away with it.
I don’t think the laws have been changed for throw-ins in recent years have they?
Iain, thanks for your comment. What I’ve noticed with Vaulks’ long throws when I’m watching them at the ground and when they take place close to where I sit is that he does sometimes have one of his feet on the field of play when he is releasing the ball – I’ve always been under the impression that was classed as a foul throw and the same applies when the player has one of his feet off the floor when taking the throw. I’m unaware of any law change and this suggests that there haven’t been any;-
http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-15—the-throw-in
Mr Hooper was also in charge against Reading, and the wrath of the City faithful must have still been ringing in his ears from the shocking performance that night. Truly awful. So that’s four home games in a row where the refereeing has been far below the standard that we should expect. Why do they always send them down here???
Thanks Paul, I just checked my piece on that Reading game to see if I had mentioned Mr Hooper because I can remember him being poor (although not as poor as he was on Saturday or as poor as the refs for the Wigan and Forest matches). I’ve always made a point of not mentioning the performance of officials on here unless they were either very good or pretty bad and we’ve had four of the latter on our last four home matches – we have to be due someone who is at least competent for the Leeds game!
…………..bugger competent, I’ll settle for a homer.
Yeah, seeing it’s Leeds, I agree with you Colin.
Paul – thanks for the Quiz link, and the atmospheric pic of the pre-Carrow Road ‘The Nest’. I have heard old-timers in these parts speak of it.
Incidentally, I’ve met a lady of 93, who was born at 90-something Carrow Road, and has lived there EVER since. Her parents used to take in Canaries players as lodgers, in the 30s and 40s.
Amazing Lindsay, she would have been there before they started playing football there wouldn’t she.
On a similar theme, when I was thirteen (69/70 season) I was given a relative’s (think he was a great uncle) season ticket for the Canton Stand around December time because he had passed away. He and his wife (who also died around the same time) were life long season ticket holders and, although I was too young to appreciate what I was being told at the time, they used to take in players in the 20s and 30s – I can’t say this is true for sure, but, seemingly, Hughie Ferguson stayed with them for a while.