Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
c1982

Oumar Niasse

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Paddock said:

He’s scored a few goals- we need a regular 20 goal a season striker- all top sides have them- he isn’t a 20 goal a season striker end of conversation.

6 goals in 9 games.... 6 of these 9 games he played for less than 45 minutes......  goals per minute even goals per games played (having only completed 90 minutes twice) is impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another striker is not going to sort however problems out from where I'm that's the least of our worries we need to sort the midfield out to take some pressure off the defence and back up the strikers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nogs said:

It's a contact sport if you play the ball. It's not rugby. Having shades of whether contact is enough to send someone down is bollocks, it creates uncertainty and inconsistency like we're getting now. If the ball is knocked past you and you step into the player running through, it's a foul. Once you add shades of grey it becomes a farce. 

It's can be grey, because carelessness and recklessness are opinion based. I wouldn't say he was careless or reckless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Aidan Lewis said:

It's can be grey, because carelessness and recklessness are opinion based. I wouldn't say he was careless or reckless.

Recklessness and intent only comes into consideration when cards get involved. A foul is a foul even if it's completely accidental. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy doesn’t get enough credit when he deserves it. Goal ratio is actually good.

He dived, he got caught. 

We can debate it all we like, but we all know it was a dive and we were lucky to get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He dived end of. 

Credit the league for punishing these offences but just because it lead to a penalty he's been caught. Players diving outside the box should be reviewed as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody dives onto their back he was simply knocked over sideways and landed on his back,  probably a cheap penalty but that's the refs fault not Niasse's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Btay said:

He dived end of. 

Credit the league for punishing these offences but just because it lead to a penalty he's been caught. Players diving outside the box should be reviewed as well.

Credit to the league when they punish a well known cheat from the sky 4.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, hafnia said:

Credit to the league when they punish a well known cheat from the sky 4.

 

It's steps in the right direction though mate... diving ruins the game 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't he banned for simulation rather than diving as such. I thought it was good defending, there is no way that level of contact should lead to Niasse going down like he has been shot. 

The problem I have is that this won't be consistent across the season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see it happen across the board. But I’m no going to make excuses for our own players just because others have got away with it.

If ye world was like this, then we could get away with anything. Murder... because someone else got away with it!

and before anyone says!... yes it is different, Football is more important than life!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Shukes said:

I would like to see it happen across the board. But I’m no going to make excuses for our own players just because others have got away with it.

If ye world was like this, then we could get away with anything. Murder... because someone else got away with it!

and before anyone says!... yes it is different, Football is more important than life!

The key question in a situation like this is, "If an opposing striker did this against Everton, what verdict would we reach?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Cornish Steve said:

The key question in a situation like this is, "If an opposing striker did this against Everton, what verdict would we reach?"

I would call him out for a dive as I’m sure you would too. It’s unfair sometimes, but it doesn’t excuse our own players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Telegraph Sport today quotes referee Anthony Taylor as saying 'that he watched replays of the incident several times and from different angles after the game and he stands by his decision.  It was a penalty.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

Hilarious, Niasse has been done for 'deceiving the ref' despite that ref still saying it's a penalty, therefore showing that the ref doesn't believe he was deceived.

You couldn't make this shit up.  

As you say the whole concept is flawed as most ref's are going to say there were not deceived and stand by their origional decision, as they don't want to appear foolish. It should be used to cover incidents where the ref did not see it, or it was outlandish and deserves extra punishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone prepared to argue against the fact that we seriously missed him yesterday?

The difference in the side with and without him is startling.  He energises the team. Without him we look spiritless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MC11 said:

Mirallas is just strolling around no good at all.

Fair play. At least you ain't defending him.

Sadly the only hero in our side has been a limited trier... who if he was lesser of a man would have crumbled at the treatment given to him by the man with a head like a goodyear blimp.

Funny isn't it. I have been tge match for a while but feel compelled to get there against West ham.  Always have done when it gets really shitty. The team need the 12th man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, hafnia said:

Anyone prepared to argue against the fact that we seriously missed him yesterday?

The difference in the side with and without him is startling.  He energises the team. Without him we look spiritless. 

I thought DCL ran his arse off and challenged everything he could.  I dont think Niasse would have made much of an impact, it certainly wouldn' have changed the result!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bailey said:

I thought DCL ran his arse off and challenged everything he could.  I dont think Niasse would have made much of an impact, it certainly wouldn' have changed the result!

There might've been someone to contest the second ball after DCL won it, because no one else was close to him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bailey said:

I thought DCL ran his arse off and challenged everything he could.  I dont think Niasse would have made much of an impact, it certainly wouldn' have changed the result!

I think Niasse will score the goals to keep us up and Hafnia, yes I agree we need to get as much support at the ground as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Matt said:

There might've been someone to contest the second ball after DCL won it, because no one else was close to him

Maybe but we generally only start one front line striker so I expect it would have been either / or.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MC11 said:

I think Niasse will score the goals to keep us up and Hafnia, yes I agree we need to get as much support at the ground as possible.

I wouldn' disagree with that generally but I'm not sure yesterday's game would have been changed by his presence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bailey said:

Maybe but we generally only start one front line striker so I expect it would have been either / or.

True. Going 442 for a bit might be something to think about to steady the ship a bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Romey 1878 said:

Let’s not start him very often eh?

He had absolutely nothing to go off. Lol. Just big hoofs up the pitch. Calvert Lewin did no better in the first half. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both him and DCL did so little closing down today, I was really surprised. That's a part of today's tactic that I couldn't stand.

Niasse is no world beater but you can't judge many players based on today. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Newty82 said:

Both him and DCL did so little closing down today, I was really surprised. That's a part of today's tactic that I couldn't stand.

Niasse is no world beater but you can't judge many players based on today. 

I think it was so we would stay compact. There is no point the front two closing down when the rest of the team is sitting back. They were positioned to try and stop Liverpool going down the flanks which is where they are most dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bailey said:

I think it was so we would stay compact. There is no point the front two closing down when the rest of the team is sitting back. They were positioned to try and stop Liverpool going down the flanks which is where they are most dangerous.

Ai but what got me was that they both just stood like statues most of the time, allowing the centre backs to easily move forward into our first 3rd. They weren't really wide or picking anyone up.

One time DCL did close one down, the lad panicked, had to turn and almost lost the ball. I think we could have tried that a bit more. They're not the best CB's around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Newty82 said:

Ai but what got me was that they both just stood like statues most of the time, allowing the centre backs to easily move forward into our first 3rd. They weren't really wide or picking anyone up.

One time DCL did close one down, the lad panicked, had to turn and almost lost the ball. I think we could have tried that a bit more. They're not the best CB's around.

Yeh it was a surprise to me as well. I guess Allardyce thought the CBs were the least dangerous players to have the ball so we let them have it.

I think they are both a liability with the ball so I would have liked to have seen us be more aggressive but we got an unlikely point and reduced them to only a couple of decent attempts so I guess that' why me and you write on a forum and he is Everton manager 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having watched the highlights on sky the following seems apparent to me:

1) Our midfield and defense was sat so deep that there was no point closing their back 4 as they always had an option to pass to, such was their dominance in midfield.

2) The pass's (and I use the world pass in the loosest possible term) up to them were more like mortar shells being launched, and gave our forwards little chance.

3) I thought DCL kept going right to the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2017 at 16:44, Bailey said:

Yeh it was a surprise to me as well. I guess Allardyce thought the CBs were the least dangerous players to have the ball so we let them have it.

I think they are both a liability with the ball so I would have liked to have seen us be more aggressive but we got an unlikely point and reduced them to only a couple of decent attempts so I guess that' why me and you write on a forum and he is Everton manager 😄

Haha!!! It's why none of us are allowed anywhere near the club other than to watch games!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×