Return to front page

Newest article: Fund our Future plea by johnnybaker26/4 16:10Fri Apr 26 16:10:49 2024view thread

Oldest article: "Hither & Thither"? by alan ainsworth24/11/2013 12:59Sun Nov 24 12:59:08 2013view thread


Next thread: game v peacehaven by essex don1/9/2014 08:31Mon Sep 1 08:31:54 2014view thread

Bogey team wins again

By mike cox (legacy user)30/8/2014 20:41Sat Aug 30 20:41:58 2014

Views: 4093

May have some complaints about previous defeats by Enfield Town but not today. Completely outclassed and not at the races at all. Would like to say we were poor, but we weren't that good.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Bogey team wins again

By SteveHFC (legacy user)30/8/2014 21:59Sat Aug 30 21:59:44 2014In response to Bogey team wins againTop of thread

Views: 3930

Very disappointing today. Can't put my finger on it, but for some reason Enfield Town know how to ensure we can't play our usual game, and we can't find a way to stop them eventually running riot.

However, whilst things didn't run for us in front of goal - we did at least keep trying through to the final whistle.

One to forget and concentrate on bouncing back at Canvey on Tuesday.

On a positive note - great to see Hendon & Enfield legend Jimmy Quail at the game. He's now 78 years old, and made his debut for us in February 1955 - nearly 60 years ago! He looked very well and always speaks fondly of his time with us.

Good to see Junior Lewis at the game too - be interesting to see what he does next.

Anyone yet figured out why our goal was disallowed? Because I haven't!

Greensnet - The Official Hendon FC Website
Hendon FC Supporters Trust Official Website

reply to this article | return to the front page

Disallowed goal

By David B (legacy user)31/8/2014 22:42Sun Aug 31 22:42:45 2014In response to Re: Bogey team wins againTop of thread

Views: 3829

The ball was headed goalwards by Lee O'Leary, who ran from behind his defender so, in my opinion could not be offside in any circumstance.

Kezie and, I think, Leon Smith ran in hoping for a rebound, deflection or half-save by the goalkeeper. I was not sure whether goalkeeper fumbled the ball forward into Kezie or straight against the post before it rebounded off his body and into the net.

People around me think the ball hit Kezie, in which case he was offside and, as he touched the ball (or it touched him - either way, it is irrelevant), he was in an active offside position. If, however, the ball had gone against only the goalkeeper and goalpost then Kezie and Leon should have been considered passive.

My instinct is that the ball made contact with Kezie, so the assistant referee almost certainly got the decision correct.

By the way, this was actually very different to Ollie Sprague's goal on Monday. Any players in an offside position on Monday were passive because they did not affect the ball's path after Ollie struck it and their position did not change Charlie Horlock's failure to make a save - the deflection did that more than adequately. In Monday's case, the referee, who had a very different angle, realised that the offside players were passive and discussed the situation with his assistant. Once it became clear that the deflection was off a defender and not one of the offside players, the referee correctly overruled his assistant.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re; Bogey team wins again

By mike cox (legacy user)31/8/2014 17:35Sun Aug 31 17:35:28 2014In response to Re: Bogey team wins againTop of thread

Views: 3671

Lino flagged for offside - the only person on ground who believed this possible. Their keeper seemed to be as bemused as us over the decision.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Bogey Team

By Jeff Hill (legacy user)31/8/2014 00:02Sun Aug 31 00:02:08 2014In response to Re: Bogey team wins againTop of thread

Views: 3748

Our goal was disallowed because the linesman was a ****.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Albert Einstein

By rwakeley (legacy user)31/8/2014 02:25Sun Aug 31 02:25:07 2014In response to Bogey TeamTop of thread

Views: 3776

Doing the same thing and expecting different results - Hello!
I personally don't buy into that augument.
I maintain our present set-up restricts our flanks in a defensive and an attacking mode, allowing intervention from the opposition.
First two Enfield goals systematic of exposed flanks and the third a by-product of our pushing in search of a goal - so no fault on that. Our weakness on the flanks also resulted in an untimely amount of un-neccessary free-kicks given away. Emblanmatic of an underlying weakness.
Watch Canvey on Tuesday because if there's a ruddy side of whom like to spray the ball across the park its that lot - although the right back might be left-footed - if last season is anything to go by.
Or was it the other way round - I digress - memory lapse!
Taggs on in the centre as a direct replacement - a failed policy. I presume Kevin is a doubt.
We're better than that! Cohesion!
I refuse to slate the lads on todays performance simply because I maintain we have totally screwed things up - and that's the first time in six years I have stated that. We played right into their hands.
We will play a lot worse than that over the course of any campaign -
What is annoying is that we have more to offer than what was shown today - I don't like our formation, annd Enfield took advantage - Seeby has 500 plus appearances at right back and looked hesitant - same with Sprague. To me they look exposed - there's no cover - little in the way of over-lap - we look a totally different proposition when these guys get forward.
I don't think we are far off the mark - but that was a real ball-ache (can I type that), of an afternoon.
Perseverance required.


reply to this article | return to the front page

Previous thread: URGENT - Volunteer Required to Help tomorrow by John29/8/2014 10:22Fri Aug 29 10:22:40 2014view thread