hoboh2o wrote:

I think Elmander is carrying or nursing an injury watching his movement, he seems reluctant to move at any sort of pace, I'll only be totally happy with him when he starts to hit the net 12-15 per season would not be unreasonable IMO.

In all seriousness...do you actually mean that?

FD wrote:

hoboh2o wrote: I think Elmander is carrying or nursing an injury watching his movement, he seems reluctant to move at any sort of pace, I'll only be totally happy with him when he starts to hit the net 12-15 per season would not be unreasonable IMO. In all seriousness...do you actually mean that?

Why not? He was supposed to be cheap at the price we acquired him for so that target range in a good season should not be beyond him.
Unless he's not really a striker that is

So unless he's knocking on the door of winning the golden boot every season, he's useless?

Oh right, thanks for clearing that one up hoboh.

Nicolas Anelka, plays half a season, scores a shitload but we nearly get relegated.

Johan Elmander, plays half a season, doesn't score too many, but we finish in complete comfort in mid-table.

I wonder which I'll take. It's shortsighted in the extreme to judge a striker purely on his goal tally. If we did, Davies would've been out on his arse years ago. As long as somebody is putting the ball in the net I don't give a toss who it is.

Tombwfc wrote:

So unless he's knocking on the door of winning the golden boot every season, he's useless? Oh right, thanks for clearing that one up hoboh. Nicolas Anelka, plays half a season, scores a shitload but we nearly get relegated. Johan Elmander, plays half a season, doesn't score too many, but we finish in complete comfort in mid-table. I wonder which I'll take. It's shortsighted in the extreme to judge a striker purely on his goal tally. If we did, Davies would've been out on his arse years ago. As long as somebody is putting the ball in the net I don't give a toss who it is.

I never said that Tom but what we paid for him is for our club like a big club spending £30 mill + so its not unreasonable to expect goals and we are not talking anyone else just Elmander. It would also be fair to say that we usually play every game with one or two players "missing".

Here I'll make your weekend!



















Megson in, the ginge minge gives us the twinge.




























































Elmander out!

hoboh2o wrote:

Tombwfc wrote: So unless he's knocking on the door of winning the golden boot every season, he's useless? Oh right, thanks for clearing that one up hoboh. Nicolas Anelka, plays half a season, scores a shitload but we nearly get relegated. Johan Elmander, plays half a season, doesn't score too many, but we finish in complete comfort in mid-table. I wonder which I'll take. It's shortsighted in the extreme to judge a striker purely on his goal tally. If we did, Davies would've been out on his arse years ago. As long as somebody is putting the ball in the net I don't give a toss who it is. I never said that Tom but what we paid for him is for our club like a big club spending £30 mill + so its not unreasonable to expect goals and we are not talking anyone else just Elmander. It would also be fair to say that we usually play every game with one or two players "missing".

I don't really understand the logic here. To be honest for us to get a (eg: Liverpool rated m30) would probably cost us closer to m35 and an even larger contract simply because that player would rather not come to Bolton. So in fact in many cases Bolton have to even overpay to get players. So we sign a player for 8 million it is natural to expect a player to play at a level valued at 15, 20 or even 30 million on the rational that we are a small club? Not sure what you are trying to say. Yes we can hope that is the case but you certainly can't expect it. When you do then that is when you get a great deal, like Cahill, Taylor and hopefully M. Davies (some day) etc (the etc bit is showing optimism). I think all would like Elmander to have fit in better to our system, and scored more goals (it's not too late yet I believe). He has not been nearly as bad as what some are saying recently, and most times the team seems to play better with him on the pitch. For us he is expensive, but based upon last seasons outrageous transfers he wasn't really that expensive at all, I say with a grimace on my face.

Oh my God! They've just had a former ref on Sky Sports News, talking about decisions over the weekend, including the Steinsson handball.

The former ref has said he WOULD have given the penalty, and that Steinsson hasn't made any effort to get out of the way, it's very convenient for him that it looks like an accident.

I actually couldn't believe my eyes. So the host of the show said "Really? Lets see that again because that sounds very harsh" and they show it again, the ref stands by the decision saying yep, I'd have given a pen as well...the host can't actually believe what he's hearing and says "Are you sure? Even though he moves out of the way? I mean, Lets see it again because that sounds very harsh"...and yep, he says defo a pen again. The host at this point gives up and says "Really...? THAT is a penalty? You're a very hard man" and they move on to the next incident.

Maybe it the Bolton fan in me, but I can't help but feel if it were the other way round and it were a Chelsea player...he'd be saying it wasn't a pen.

I'm actually in shock that a former professional referee would sit there and say it WAS a penalty, after watching it three times, after being pressed by a journalist/host about it.

No wonder players shout and swear at refs, they've no f**king idea. What a c**t!!

FD wrote:

Oh my God! They've just had a former ref on Sky Sports News, talking about decisions over the weekend, including the Steinsson handball. The former ref has said he WOULD have given the penalty, and that Steinsson hasn't made any effort to get out of the way, it's very convenient for him that it looks like an accident. I actually couldn't believe my eyes. So the host of the show said "Really? Lets see that again because that sounds very harsh" and they show it again, the ref stands by the decision saying yep, I'd have given a pen as well...the host can't actually believe what he's hearing and says "Are you sure? Even though he moves out of the way? I mean, Lets see it again because that sounds very harsh"...and yep, he says defo a pen again. The host at this point gives up and says "Really...? THAT is a penalty? You're a very hard man" and they move on to the next incident. Maybe it the Bolton fan in me, but I can't help but feel if it were the other way round and it were a Chelsea player...he'd be saying it wasn't a pen. I'm actually in shock that a former professional referee would sit there and say it WAS a penalty, after watching it three times, after being pressed by a journalist/host about it. No wonder players shout and swear at refs, they've no f**king idea. What a c**t!!

I'm not. Not even in the least. Look at the decisions especially the past few years, and not just against Bolton. Remember the penalty in the Man U game earlier this season. While the ref admitted he made a mistake, he wasn't even punished for such a terrible call. Learn to live with it, it will help keep your blood pressure down.

hoboh2o wrote:

FD wrote: hoboh2o wrote: I think Elmander is carrying or nursing an injury watching his movement, he seems reluctant to move at any sort of pace, I'll only be totally happy with him when he starts to hit the net 12-15 per season would not be unreasonable IMO. In all seriousness...do you actually mean that? Why not? He was supposed to be cheap at the price we acquired him for so that target range in a good season should not be beyond him. Unless he's not really a striker that is

Whether he scores 12-15 or sets up 12-15 isn't really relevant. My concern is that he seems to lack the killer instinct that will get him into position to do either one.

seanworth wrote:

I'm not. Not even in the least. Look at the decisions especially the past few years, and not just against Bolton. Remember the penalty in the Man U game earlier this season. While the ref admitted he made a mistake, he wasn't even punished for such a terrible call. Learn to live with it, it will help keep your blood pressure down.

I think you are missing the point mate, this is a former ref who wasn't involved in the match in question, given the chance to watch a replay of the incident three times, pressured by someone about the decision yet still siding with the wrong decision.

It's shocking, but sums up our game.

FD wrote:

seanworth wrote: I'm not. Not even in the least. Look at the decisions especially the past few years, and not just against Bolton. Remember the penalty in the Man U game earlier this season. While the ref admitted he made a mistake, he wasn't even punished for such a terrible call. Learn to live with it, it will help keep your blood pressure down. I think you are missing the point mate, this is a former ref who wasn't involved in the match in question, given the chance to watch a replay of the incident three times, pressured by someone about the decision yet still siding with the wrong decision. It's shocking, but sums up our game.

Sorry but still not surprised. Guess I'm just more bitter and cynical.

It wouldn't have been given at the other end.
Therefore, it wasn't a penalty.

FD wrote:

seanworth wrote: I'm not. Not even in the least. Look at the decisions especially the past few years, and not just against Bolton. Remember the penalty in the Man U game earlier this season. While the ref admitted he made a mistake, he wasn't even punished for such a terrible call. Learn to live with it, it will help keep your blood pressure down. I think you are missing the point mate, this is a former ref who wasn't involved in the match in question, given the chance to watch a replay of the incident three times, pressured by someone about the decision yet still siding with the wrong decision. It's shocking, but sums up our game.

Referees always stick together. They need to present an air of infallibility because if they start running around telling everyone "Yup, Rob Styles is a bloody half-wit and I don't know how he cocked that one up" then eventually the powers that be will realize that we'd be better off with video cameras and a sensor in the ball. These guys are trying to protect their profession by pretending that there's some sort of universal standard they all operate from, rather than just making it up as they go along and getting it wrong far too often.

H. Pedersen wrote:

Referees always stick together.

If that's the case then how come the decision they reviewed beforehand, he said the ref got it wrong?

What I couldn't believe was the two lads infront of me who had paid £43 each for a ticket and walked out with 30 minutes to go.

I cannot remember coming away from another game where it felt like we have won when we have actually lost. The looks on the Chelsea faces were amazing.

Steinsson was in no position to do anything given the distance he was away from the shot and his reaction time. He still managed to half turn his back and keep his arms down by his sides. The ref might even have been forgiven for making a mistake had he admitted it. For another professional ref to see it three times in replay and still insist it was a penalty, ie handling the ball, when it hit his back/shoulder is just farcial.

I've seen loads of occasions when ball-to hand hasn't resulted in penalties because it was declared accidental and not intentional. Bottom line, it cost us another critical point due to refereeing error. We've seen enough of them to feel rightly aggrieved. This was just another example.

In continuation of my paranoid media anti-Bolton theory, the Mirror today managed to make note of "Andy O'Brien's offside goal" without a single mention of the Lampard penalty, or how it wasn't one.

Also, as an aside...is this true regarding Elmander?

Quote:

It is not all rosy in the garden, though. The Whites switched off on too many occasions for Megson’s liking and the return of O’Brien for Shittu – who had been largely solid before picking up an injury – was not exactly spectacular. Striker Elmander also looks woefully short of confidence. His irritated shake of the head after taking his place on the bench on 66 minutes said it all.

FD wrote:

In continuation of my paranoid media anti-Bolton theory, the Mirror today managed to make note of "Andy O'Brien's offside goal" without a single mention of the Lampard penalty, or how it wasn't one. Also, as an aside...is this true regarding Elmander? Quote: It is not all rosy in the garden, though. The Whites switched off on too many occasions for Megson’s liking and the return of O’Brien for Shittu – who had been largely solid before picking up an injury – was not exactly spectacular. Striker Elmander also looks woefully short of confidence. His irritated shake of the head after taking his place on the bench on 66 minutes said it all.

Does it matter?

Would you prefer it said 'and record signing sat down grinning like a cheshire cat despite another frustrating outing'

Think about it, eh?

CAPSLOCK wrote:

Think about it, eh?

Why d'you think I posted a question about it for f**k sake?

Dunno, I really haven't got a clue

Yes, it's true.