HanaleiJ5N wrote: » Poor enough game I felt, with respect the goal should never have been allowed, an outrageous number of steps taken. Given how early it came though it can't be argued it had a decisive impact on the game, we had 70 minutes to recover from it. And we might have, had Nash not received a silly second yellow. Both his yellows were more so careless than malicious. Strictly speaking, we can have no complaints, but I wish he had received a stern talking to by the ref instead of a second yellow. Going down to 14 men sealed the deal, we never looked like overhauling it from there on. We battled away but you always had that cushion and added to it when necessary, and you turned it on for a brief spell very early in the second half, put the gap out to 6 or 7 points, which basically ensured the game was safe unless we could get a goal or two, which we never looked like doing. I liked McInerney, played well, was a right handful, surged forward on a few occasions, but the concern was the high wide count. It pretty much cost you the Cork game last July and it still hasn't gone away, this really should have been much more comfortable for Clare, you kept us at arms length but you never killed us off, sometimes that will backfire, you were reasonably safe today as we were down the man and posed no goal threat. Still though, you got the all important win, I hate to say it was fully deserved too Congrats
dastardly00 wrote: » I thought O'Donnell was mostly a passenger to be honest. I'm not sure, but I don't think he even had possession of the ball once in the first half. As far as a I can remember, he got fouled once in the 2nd half that resulted in a point from the free, and I think he assisted another point during play. I though he was very poor. He can feel fortunate that he was kept on when others around him were being subbed off.
LuckyGent88 wrote: » Iv been critical of him a lot recently due to his lack of scores but I thought he did very well today especially in the second half. He is been asked to do many jobs and would agree with you that he didn't do much in first half but I can remember on 2 occasions him tracking back and regaining possession which then led to us getting a score. He never got low ball into him which would be ideal more than high long balls down on top of him and along with that he is usually double marked. Even in the second half with them down to 14 he was still double marked. And once he gets the ball he is generally fouled. Hopefully going into the summer and the better pitches he will cause lots of damage. As long as he is used correctly of course.
windy shepard henderson wrote: » i taught he worked hard too , like yourself i also taught he should be dropped , he only scored a hand full of points so far in the league but for the role he was asked to play today he covered himself well , taught he should have been substituted for honan late on not because of anything he did wrong but as a height option in the full forward line , for some reason clonlara persist with playing honan on the 40 as well a positioned i feel he is wasted at every time shane touches the ball he will nearly always have two men marking him , so to contribute to the score board as much as he did ( think he was key to 4 points ) between frees and set up play i would be happy for now bigger problem would be galvin's wide tally , i would hate to speculate how many of the 18 wide's he contributed to today
LuckyGent88 wrote: » Playing Tipp in ennis. Should be a huge test of where we really are. Nearly prefer to play thurlas as we will be playing Waterford there in the championship
crazyguy01 wrote: » Anthony Daly wasn't impressed with the "new" stand!! I was in quite early and thought it was comfy enough compared to what was there before for up to three hours... Any thoughts on this from anyone else...? For some reason can't quote his interview link...
windy shepard henderson wrote: to be fair they should have filled in both corners of the stand while they were renovating it , there is simply not enough seating available in the park, definitely not ideal for family's with small kids or older people needing a place to sit down , yesterday the stand was full before 20 past 1 , some people would be only leaving home at that time , fantastic atmosphere for a small venue but nowhere near the amount of seats required
crazyguy01 wrote: » Any idea who is due back from injury for it. I know Ryan will be back from honeymoon but on Clare FM Davy did say "we'll have a couple back, you'll see in 2 weeks"...... Cards close to chest.
windy shepard henderson wrote: podge will be available again , tony kelly is expected back aswell although i would imagine he would be coming off the bench , podge will probably get a run out with the footballers at the weekend at some stage so he will be fully fit to start in my opinion and play the full game in two weeks time , colin ryan will be back from honeymoon so he will also be available , jack browne could be available for selection too so it will provide serious selection headaches for the management , but that's exactly what we would have hoped for so soon to the start of the championship
crazyguy01 wrote: » Looking at yesterday, the backs OK in my opinion, but to see Podge, Ryan and the possibility of Kelly (even for a while as a sub) all back is exactly what was missing. Those headaches would be no harm... Can't be risking that many wides any more to have any success.
Clareman wrote: I number of the frees that Bobby missed were very score-able, the 65 from in front of the posts in the first half was particularly disappointing, he would have had a very low return rate on his frees, I would also say that the pressure on Sunday was a fraction of what would be expected in a Championship match, having our backup freetaker to have "pressure" issues is a worry, then again I would imagine that Tony Kelly would be ahead of Bobby in the free taking stakes.
crazyguy01 wrote: » It came to the stage that by a certain point in the game I almost wasn't surprised when a free went wide! Certainly Kelly would be ahead of him but no point in bringing anybody back too soon, SOD seemed to have a bit of a limp walking off, anyone hear anything about that?
Clareman wrote: » Free taking is a skill, being able to stand up when you have 8,847 sets of eyes looking at you is a daunting ask of anyone. To have a free taker you can rely on is a massive bonus to any team.
Akrasia wrote: » What's Sean McMahon doing these days, can he be coaxed out of retirement?
buck65 wrote: » Just on the stand and the ground in general. It does look like the old stand got a lick of paint from a distance. The rear of the stand is better insofar as there is more room for walking. Can't believe there was €2 million spent here though - looks more like a €500k job. The rest of the stadium is the same i.e a kip. Cusack Park should have been redeveloped to seat aprox 8,000 with terraces bringing the capacity to 11 or 12k. This would be enough for 90% of the games played there.
Green Tae wrote: » I counted three aggressive fouls in quick succession in the run up to the penalty. The referee signaled play on and a very good goal was taken so technically, no extra steps were used; that's the way the advantage rule is supposed to work. Well done referee!
Green Tae wrote: » He didn't take any excessive number of steps because once advantage is awarded the player is entitled to a further four steps. Prior to the first aggressive foul against him Conlon had not made any technical error, he was going for goal - he got fouled, once, then a second time and finally a third time before he stuck the ball past the keeper. Good goal by the way!
Advantage Rule is defined as: “When a foul is committed the referee may allow the play to continue if he considers it to be to the advantage of the offended team. He shall signal that advantage by raising an arm upright. If he deems no advantage to have occurred, he may subsequently award a free for that foul from where it occurred*. The referee shall allow the advantage to run by maintaining his arm in the upright position for up to five seconds after the initial foul or for less time if it becomes clear that no advantage has accrued. He shall apply any relevant disciplinary action.”
Clareman wrote: » Sorry but I'm not aware of that rulehttp://www.gaa.ie/the-gaa/rules-regulations/ I would have said that there wouldn't be any advantage if the player had to foul the ball to continue