jsslatic Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 From our end it looked like Cisak had been fouled but I appreciate we were a long way away. The reaction of the Latics players indicated though they felt some foul play had taken place. Eyresy said on BBC Lancs after the game Phil Brown would have been very angry if it had been given against them, which to me meant it was probably a foul but the jaundiced one has said it wasn't... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snookmeister Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 From our end it looked like Cisak had been fouled but I appreciate we were a long way away. The reaction of the Latics players indicated though they felt some foul play had taken place. Eyresy said on BBC Lancs after the game Phil Brown would have been very angry if it had been given against them, which to me meant it was probably a foul but the jaundiced one has said it wasn't... My gut reaction was that it was a howler from Cisak. Didn't seem to be much contact. Will have to see it again though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slystallone Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 My 1st reaction was that it was a foul......i need to see theTV footage but from our away end it looked a foul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluehobbit Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 i kinda took my eye of it so couldn't be sure if it was a foul but surely even if it wasn't there guy was a mile of side and jumping the keeper is effecting play ??? so it shouldn't have counted even if there wasnt a foul? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmer1 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 just seen the 3rd goal on ssn and it looked very soft 9 times out of 10 it will be given as a foul on the goal keeper the problem is keepers expect it to be given in their favour nowadays evertime if cisak is a little stronger in the challenge ans shows more authorityby making the contact with the striker himself he would probably have got the decision possible contact but poor keeping imo...oh well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc-lover Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 just seen the 3rd goal on ssn and it looked very soft 9 times out of 10 it will be given as a foul on the goal keeper the problem is keepers expect it to be given in their favour nowadays evertime if cisak is a little stronger in the challenge ans shows more authorityby making the contact with the striker himself he would probably have got the decision possible contact but poor keeping imo...oh well Agree , it was simply an eye off the ball moment of panic which cost us dearly ( then again he made a few cracking saves first half! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaskedOwl Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 I've watched this goal several times now and it looks like a complete howler by Cisak to me. There is minimal contact, if any between their player and Cisak. I think he gets distracted by their player and just misses the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 just seen the 3rd goal on ssn and it looked very soft 9 times out of 10 it will be given as a foul on the goal keeper the problem is keepers expect it to be given in their favour nowadays evertime if cisak is a little stronger in the challenge ans shows more authorityby making the contact with the striker himself he would probably have got the decision possible contact but poor keeping imo...oh well You may have hit the nail on the head there, I think Cisak needs to works his upper body strength, but he's only young and there's not much wrong apart from that IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc-latics Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 it was a high ball, so maybe he lost it in those massive floodlights, and with the presence of the striker that put him off, thats how he didnt get it. annoying thing is, he was practising high balls and crosses into the box for about 20 mins before kick off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 (edited) From what I've seen, I think its one of those where yes sometimes it gets given as a foul but it probably wasn't. Especially as if the forward doesnt touch him I think it still goes in; Cisak gets under it too much and it just sneaks under the bar with a significant amount of dip. Edited October 26, 2011 by rudemedic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fleetwood Blue Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 The text i recieved from my mate who is a pne fan and sat right behind the goal read, 'haha your keeper :censored: himself, he looked at the player first'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 From one of the clips on YouTube, I think Cisak made a mess of it. Roll on the proper BBC piccies later! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 (edited) From one of the clips on YouTube, I think Cisak made a mess of it. Roll on the proper BBC piccies later! In the 1960s Latics full back Bob Ledger was a specialist in 'up and unders', causing panic in the opposition goalmouth as the ball came down with snow on it. I'm amazed this tactic is hardly used today, but then I guess it's not in the F.A.coaching manual and many coaches can't see beyond that. Edited October 27, 2011 by BP1960 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 On the BBC Highlights the PNE player makes contact with Cisak in the air, making it impossible for him to catch the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 On the BBC Highlights the PNE player makes contact with Cisak in the air, making it impossible for him to catch the ball. I think that's stretching the definition of 'impossible'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafckev Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 It's one of those where little contact makes a big impact. The PNE player knows that he can't push him in the net so he stands so close to him that he becomes an irritant to the goalie - increasing the chance of a mistake. If anything it's unsportsmanship from their player and the ref should have gave a foul. Still... made part of one the best games in years a little more interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 I think that's stretching the definition of 'impossible'. The way I see it, he was positioned properly, didn't appear to take his eye off the ball, and if it had been possible to catch it he would have done so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Don't want to be critical of Cisak as I think he's the best keeper we've had in ages. But having watched it on TV I think he was at fault for the goal. If it had been the other way around we would have been complaining like mad if it had been disallowed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razza699 Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 looks soft , but Cisaks first possible mistake , not bad going Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snookmeister Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 The way I see it, he was positioned properly, didn't appear to take his eye off the ball, and if it had been possible to catch it he would have done so. Got to disagree, Diego. I think he DID take his eye off the ball. It was a routine catch, but he seemed more worried about the forward than the ball. Ah well. That's only his first blunder, hopefully there'll be no more for a long time yet.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluehobbit Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 its a soft one isnt it? Looking at it a few times the Preston player does make contact with Cisak so it could be given but the way he spawls in the net afterwards makes me think he was trying to make more of the contact than there actually was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Got to disagree, Diego. I think he DID take his eye off the ball. You may think that, but the BBC video footage clearly shows him keeping his eyes on the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 You may think that, but the BBC video footage clearly shows him keeping his eyes on the ball. You can see his eyes, can you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 You can see his eyes, can you? I've been to Specsavers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snookmeister Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 You can see his eyes, can you? Beat me to it, Stevie! That must be one hell of a high definition picture you're looking at Diego!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.