Weston Goals

BenE wrote:
I know this is mightily close to perceived management bashing but I have another point. McCootie was on a hat trick when he was taken off. David Pratt has been taken off in similar circumstances as have other strikers. I think he should have stayed on.

I was also surprised when McCootie went off, but for a slightly different reason - I keep reading/hearing that Pratt is struggling with a niggling injury, isn't 100% fit etc. and yet McCootie was the one to sit out the last 15 minutes. I think we may have made an error in not leaving him on and giving him the opportunity to be the main man with 2 wide players supporting him. He must have been high on adrenalin anyway at that point so I wouldn't expect fatigue to have been an issue, and it would have stepped up his confidence.

I think part of the reason for McCootie being subbed was due to the fact he was on a yellow and he had made a couple of over excited tackles (probably due to the adrenaline)

Marc Monitor wrote:I was joking about that last bit! Come on, it's still the holiday season. I think Richard III was being fairly light-hearted as well.

Yes I was. Thing is you lot are soooo easy to wind up...

Dusty Lynfield wrote:I think part of the reason for McCootie being subbed was due to the fact he was on a yellow and he had made a couple of over excited tackles (probably due to the adrenaline)

I believe he already has 5 yellows. A one match suspension probably for the Staines game.

He served a one-match ban recently, think he missed Gosport home. I can't remember the cut off point with yellows again.

McCootie now has five bookings for us but had already picked up a couple at Paulton. I agree that he appeared to be one more mistimed tackle from getting a red.

I thought on Thursday Pratt was beginning to look more like his old self so hopefully he is getting over his injury problem.

I did think the starting line-up was an odd one but as the post-match comments show we rarely know of any minor injuries/illness. Then with the changes at HT and in the second half it meant, like the Boreham Wood game, we were the stronger/fitter side in the 2nd half.

And it's good to hear the management bashing is all in good fun this week.

stillmanjunior wrote:He served a one-match ban recently, think he missed Gosport home. I can't remember the cut off point with yellows again.

Thank you. I had forgotten about his "Paulton yellow cards".

Just thinking about McCootie's second goal, does the rule regarding 'high foot' not apply to overhead kicks?

A Weston defender's head was quite close to the point of contact, and if a striker got their foot that high from a standing position the defenders would no doubt get the decision and a foul be given for a high foot. Yet flinging yourself off the ground and swinging your legs around above head height seems to be ok. Is it because they're such spectacular goals when they come off that the authorities allow it?!

Lol and I was joking too Marc and Richard, lighten up boys, its only a game !

...and what are jokes?

When Lord Bear and myself ruled the roost on here, it was a place for solemn discussion of the day's vital issues. The sooner this forum returns to that higher plateau, the better!

Timbo_b-o-a wrote:Just thinking about McCootie's second goal, does the rule regarding 'high foot' not apply to overhead kicks?

A Weston defender's head was quite close to the point of contact, and if a striker got their foot that high from a standing position the defenders would no doubt get the decision and a foul be given for a high foot. Yet flinging yourself off the ground and swinging your legs around above head height seems to be ok. Is it because they're such spectacular goals when they come off that the authorities allow it?!

My thoughts also.
As far as I am aware the rules in the penalty box are the same as the rest of the pitch, and by the letter of the law that was a high foot and therefore dangerous play. Lucky it was in our favour!

The FIFA guidelines for Playing In A Dangerous Manner say "A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that, in the opinion of the referee, it is not dangerous to an opponent." It looked to me at the time, and the video seems to confirm, that McCootie was already through his kicking action before the centre-half lunged in the general direction of where the ball had been. So I'm assuming the ref gave the goal because if the centre-half was in any danger, it was through his action not that of McCootie.

I do believe you lot would be happier if the ref had disallowed the second goal and that the first was given as an own goal. The lad needs a bit of love to get his season going, we need a more confident striker so rejoice in two well taken goals I say. Or am I missing another joke?

Im delighted he's got two and hopefully will do his confidence the world of good.

I was just airing my musings on overhead kicks in general, thanks Corstonian for digging around for the answer!

I have to say that I thought it was a high foot and have seen such excellent goals ruled out before.