Discussion in 'The Hornets' Nest - Watford Chat' started by hornetboy1, Oct 30, 2017.
I'm sure you can get tablets for paranoia. Might be worth asking your GP
Why go to your GP when you can just ask the light switches?
Fair enough.. sorry i take my comment back as i misread what you meant following our earlier exchanges.
Get your point about opening a can of worms though at the same time the way it has worked before meant players getting away with stuff because the officials might not have spotted something and that cant be right either. By that i'm not referring to every little incident but the more serious ones. It's down to the FA to sort out and decide what they think is serious.
OK so no one was injured this time.. and Allen played it down (fair play to him for doing that btw) but there have been plenty of incidents, without injury, that have been classed as violent conduct in the past.
I'd echo the words of ZZ above when he said they were forced to act because the incident was ugly.. come on it was. It didnt look good seeing our captain lose control like that.. captain's armband clearly in sight.. and i felt some kind of punishment was warranted. Regardless of trial by media or opposition manager intervention.
While I'm at the doctors, you can go to Specsavers at the same time, so you can open your eyes.
Lock him up!
Irrespective of the rules and the fact he was booked he deserved some sort of retrospective punishment. Players get sent off and a 3 match ban for far less than that on a weekly basis. If he’d just punched him it would’ve been fair enough and in the heat of the moment understandable, but it was a little odd and quite sinister the way he was trying to squash his face, and it went on for quite some time too. I get the impression he was trying to hold him at arms length and show his strength but Allen was a bit stronger than he thought so it all get a bit weird.
Been wondering lately whether there's an element of 'raging against the dying of the light' with Deeney lately: talking a good game but with little end product to back it up; he does seem to be in decline.
As far as the retrospective charging goes, what is going to happen to the really serious anomaly of the nasty, studs-up, potential leg breaker that the ref sees and deems worthy of just a yellow? Potential to do a lot more lasting damage than TD's moulding playdoh effort.
Like the Rooney shocker a while back, which was greeted by MOTD pundits with "He'll be disappointed when he sees that again" and "Wayne won't need telling that's not a great tackle (not "He could have been sent off twice", as tends to greet our transgressions of similar magnitude).
Looking at the video/pictorial evidence, we can't really complain that he's been charged. I - like others - presumed Oliver had seen it all and booked him for it and therefore they couldn't charge him. Can only assume in his match report that he stated Troy was yellow carded just for the shove.
The only gripe I have about the issue is consistency. As long as future incidents of a similar nature (i.e - when it appears a player has already been booked) are given the same treatment (looked at by the panel and complete condemnation in the press) then I can accept it. But whether this is unfounded or not, you can't help but think/believe that certain "big" players from "big" teams might not be subjected to the same scrutiny. The cynic in me feels that "they" were keen to get us on something after they were unable to do anything about Richarlison. I accept this is unproven and probably my own paranoia.
As others have mentioned, we now get to find out if Okaka really is history at the club. If Sinclair is named in the squad ahead of him, we know for sure he's finished here.
It is only right and proper that Troy has been charged with violent conduct, it is there all over the place for all to see, however two things anoy me, the people who ultimately ban Troy will only see the incident, they won't take any notice of what happened all through the game making Troy reach boiling point and react the way he did. The keeper was plainly cheating by kicking the ball out as if he was launching an missile into space (row 33 actually) after seeing his defender pretending to be hurt! Butland knew exactly what he was doing as he had been doing it all game TIME WASTING
The other annoying point is why does Mark Hughes (great player, lost my respect as a manager ) have to get on his high horse after the game and demand Troy is banned, he should leave the FA to get on it, I didn't hear Silva saying the the whole Stoke team should be banned for their antics!
I think it's right he was charged. Clearly there are subjective interpretations judging by this thread but to me it looked pretty frightening and a different level of intensity to what one normally sees. Rightly or wrongly it did make me think of the night club incident and wonder how frightening it must be to be up against an angry Deeney. It's probably unfair of me to link the incidents in my mind but I really don't think he did himself any favours reacting like that.
I appreciate Deeney and the great stuff he has done on and off the pitch for the club/community. But I was also pretty irked by his Arsenal comments. Not because they were inaccurate but because it can backfire on the club in that other teams may be more up for it against us. Certainly Arsenal will be well pumped up whenever they now play us and looking for retribution. Not helpful for Watford FC imo.
Much as I hate troy this is pussy ****.
So he pinched some cheeks? Hardly attempted murder.
Whilst I was not impressed by Troy Deeney's actions on Saturday it was Allen that went after him in the first place, and also Shawcross leaning in with his head. Whilst the face grabbing looked pretty gruesome, those accusing him of being a bully need to remember his actions were reactionary, and he didn't openly seek conflict. I would hope I wouldn't react in a similar manner but its hard to know if someone came up to me screaming in an aggressive manner. Anyways two wrongs don't make a right and he should have controlled himself better. Also for Hughes to act like he did, both during the match, and afterwards was totally unacceptable. The manager is there to set a role model, not run around screaming, stamping your feet, and jumping up and down in an apopleptic rage, cue immediate melee involving the players! An absolute dinosaur of a manager, who has little place at the top table anymore.
In the 80s didn't most of the media really have it in for us due to our style of football etc?
So maybe HB1 has a point - we aren't one of those loved like some clubs are but not sure all those pundits "hate us" (well maybe Micky Quinn and Robbie Savage do) but they only really care about us if we are changing managers or playing a big team.
Still maybe we ought to be grateful we get talked about at all!
BTW I presume aiming a head butt doesn't count as violent conduct?
Break might do Deeney good - get back to looking fitter and sharp which was lacking on Saturday.
Are we men or are we mice? I have no idea really whether Troy has been singled out for being an offender from a lesser club or not. Equally, if he has, I couldn't give a sh.t.
We are the mighty WFC. We have the best owners in the country. We have an excellent new young manager. We have an excellent squad of creative players. We have the mighty Rookery with the biggest flag in ...? We will not be denied. We are Watford.
Get with the agenda lads. Anti -football is just that and will be found out. Believe.
Stoke's whole game plan was objectionable but Troy can have no complaints and some contrition would be sensible.
Don't hold your breath...
Assume he made it to Cardiff in time for the Joshua fight, anyhow.
And anyone expecting Troy to come back fitter from a three match plus International break is laughing in the face of history.
Cut me some slack, just saw through Burnley v Newcastle, which made Saturday look like El Classico.
No. There's no contrition from anti-football. While that remains the case then Troy can rearrange the dish of any anti-footballer he likes as far as I'm concerned.
A take from Rugby Union would be good here. Contact sport. It happens. Handbags. Nothing to see here. Move on.
As for anti-football? That's far more serious. And will, if it's allowed to continue, ultimately lead to the demise of all the TV money. On which everything depends.
Has anyone actually looked back at the events or are you commenting on them from memory?
The "headbutt" wasnt a headbutt.. it was at most a head push but more a head coming together. He (Shawcross) shouldnt have been there but lets not change what happened to suit us.
The coming together of Deeney and Allen wasnt instigated by the Stoke payer. They went for each other at exactly the same time.
Hughes wasnt on his high horse or calling for a ban for Deeney after the game. What he actually said was that it was "unnecessary and maybe needs to be looked at" Seems reasonable under the circumstances doesnt it ?
If you dont believable me look at it again on motd (from 1.18.40)
Riddled with contempt? I really don’t think that’s the case. Not even close.
Deeney deserved to be charged and has been charged.
I'm not going to cry, point at the rules and shriek about conspiracies when the governing body does the right thing. It's 100% the right thing to do.
Hard to disagree, but the correct decision by Oliver should have been reds for both Deeney and Allen, who was the very aggressive instigator, as a surprising number of Stoke fans admit on their forum.
Raises interesting questions about the potential use of VAR, which I'm instinctively against, except for this type of unseemly carry on ~ the ref has no hope of seeing everything and too many players see it as a free hit, as it were. There probably should have been several yellows, too, including coaching staff.
Well i guess if you find one a surprising number.
Oliver clearly didn't see what happened in its entirely or they both would have been off.
I'm certainly not going to criticise him for not being omnipresent, but as you said it clearly indicates the value of a VAR.
Which I have no real issue with so long as this is the new norm going forward. I very much doubt it will be however.
No, I don't.
Definitely deserved to be charged, although there have been worse incidents in other games that the FA have let go. You get the feeling that his partially being judged on his past as much as the incident.
Unfortunately for Troy that takes out most of November and with the club looking to strengthen in January he has just given them the opportunely to move him on. We know that Marco loves team players and i'm not sure he see's Troy in that way.
By the end of January he'll either end up at a top 6 Championship Club, probably Fulham, or somewhere like Palace or Swansea who will see him as a no risk investment in a relegation fight or investment for the Championship next season.
Trouble is Oliver chose not to see alot during that game. Although it does not excuse any of the players, including Deeney, the ref had lost control long before the end. He failed to deal with mainly Stoke niggly fouls, blocking off, shirt pulling and time wasting. Our players got frustrated by Stoke negative tactics plus their own ineptitude in the final third. I am normally supportive of refs but Oliver was uncharacteristically a shrinking violet on Saturday.
I would say all our central strikers are under threat in January. Deeney is not the player he was 2 years ago and I don’t think he’s the type Silva would look to sign had he not already been at the club. I think it would more likely be West Brom or Birmingham for his next destination if he was to move though.
Okaka clearly has qualities and is by far the best finisher at the club, but there has been a fall out between him and the head coach, so he must be a risk for going.
Gray has been disappointing and has been dropped for the last couple of games. However I felt he played well when he came on against Stoke and it would be a surprise if the club sold their record signing so quickly, although I suspect privately they regret spending quite so much money on him.
Oliver is an ego ref. He wants to make big decisions in big games. I suspect Watford v Stoke was so mundane for him that he couldn’t really be bothered.
Don't agree. Stoke won the game through a sound defensive performance and breaking up the game. They had a plan and it came off. We weren't good enough on the day to overcome it. Absolutely nothing wrong at all with that as far as I'm concerned.
Straight out violence on the premier league pitch with all the cameras and close ups from every angle is not acceptable. Would you accept having that done to you if you were playing in a Sunday league or pub game? If they let him get away with it, then it's saying it's an acceptable way to react on the football field and quite rightly, they've indicated that it's not.
As someone else said earlier, very succinctly, Troy has been a bit of a **** lately.
As frustrating as it is to lose to a performance like Stoke's, if we beat a superior footballing side with similar tactics, we'd be chuffed to bits.
It's up to the opponents to counter the "anti football" and make it not pay off. There's no crime in winning ugly if necessary.
No-one got hurt. No-one could possibly have been hurt. No punches were thrown, no real head-butts were butted, no elbows were flailed, no studs over-the-top tackles were made. It just 'looked bad on the telly'. Bad handbags. So this kangaroo court is consequently cosmetic.
Imagine a No.8 doing that to a scrum-half on the rugby field. It would be laughed off as a joke. Another contact sport for strong men but one that understands that tempers can sometimes rise and sensibly doesn't take 'handbags' too seriously but does now come down hard on seriously dangerous play. It has its priorities right.
Meanwhile the advance of anti-football risks a fatality. Of football itself.
Anti-football, hahaha, you lot are starting to sound like Arsenal fans.
How exactly has Troy been 'acting the canute' recently? He spoke the truth about the Gooners following us stuffing the Gooners. Spoke a 'home truth' that all Gooners knew anyway. Whether he was wise to do that with regard to how the Gooners and other teams will approach us in future is another matter and Marco was right to have a word with him about 'cause and effect'. But he's a refreshingly honest contributor on the media which makes a change from the usual anodyne comments. And he's been complimented for both his Gooner comments and previous contributions.
Then he committed the crime of not contributing much at all on the pitch on Saturday.
Anything else I've missed?