In the last few weeks we've seen Monk comment on the length of grass, how many yellow cards we seem to get and that we "found it too easy to retain possession"- Eric Imhof thinks he should stick to talking about football...
Garry Monk has analyzed every foul that his players have committed this season, as well as every one they’ve received apparently, and feels that Swansea are getting the short end of the stick early in this new season. It’s hard to argue with him. Bony’s first yellow against Southampton was laughable [not sure I agree with that! - Ed], and Rangel’s defensive-standing-there foul (an obscure one in the rule book) against Sunderland was an affront to the physical laws of time and space.
Factor in all the similar fouls that have gone unpenalised for opposing teams, and it’s easy to see Monk’s point. When a team is allowed to use the cynical strategy of fouling in order to monkeywrench the opponent’s passing game without fear of racking up cards, then you get something that’s less than fair and, in my view, that's not football. My Swans partisanship aside, Swansea should’ve been playing ten Saints in the second half two weeks ago, and should’ve had a penalty at the Stadium of Light last Saturday. Instead, they had to soldier on with one wing clipped.
I don’t point this out as an excuse (the recent laying of eggs has been the Swans’ own doing—to continue the bird puns), but rather to highlight a potentially worrying trend. If this pattern continues, then the formula for anyone playing Swansea becomes clear: foul early, and often. Not only will you grind the flow to a halt, but you’ll end up enjoying a numerical advantage as a reward for your sabotage.
Facing that kind of eventuality, Monk is right to call out the strange decisions he’s seen as of late. If nothing else, he has an obligation to protect his players from the threat of injury, and with a trip to Stoke up next on the docket, it’s perhaps a wise move to bring his recent observations to the FA’s attention. He also has to somehow stop the flood of yellow cards, or else face the prospect of suiting up himself, as the combination of suspensions and injuries may leave his roster alarmingly thin.
But having a private word is one thing; is there really a need to go public? I have to say, something doesn’t sit right with me about the resulting headline. “Monk blames refs for Swans’ form” doesn’t exactly instill confidence, or give the supporters something to be excited about—especially considering that last week’s scapegoat was the actual grass on the pitch.
Yes, the refereeing in the last few matches has been, let’s say, as confusing as Louis van Gaal’s hairstyle, but it’s never a good sign when players and coaches start chalking up losses to the mercurial and unfailingly bewildering mind of refs.
The calls are always going to seem horrible from each person’s point of view; the only hope is that over the course of 38 games the bad calls even themselves out. But even if they don’t (and they never have seemed to for Swansea, who went all of the 2012/2013 season without being awarded a penalty kick), if the game comes down to one or two shrug-worthy decisions, then you really have no right to complain, since such rolls of the dice are, well, rolls of dice after all.
In conclusion, Monk’s not wrong, but perhaps he should spend more time analyzing his substitution strategy and less time replaying every foul. Or, is blowing two leads at home to a team who hasn’t scored an away goal since March a problem for the referees?
Factor in all the similar fouls that have gone unpenalised for opposing teams, and it’s easy to see Monk’s point. When a team is allowed to use the cynical strategy of fouling in order to monkeywrench the opponent’s passing game without fear of racking up cards, then you get something that’s less than fair and, in my view, that's not football. My Swans partisanship aside, Swansea should’ve been playing ten Saints in the second half two weeks ago, and should’ve had a penalty at the Stadium of Light last Saturday. Instead, they had to soldier on with one wing clipped.
I don’t point this out as an excuse (the recent laying of eggs has been the Swans’ own doing—to continue the bird puns), but rather to highlight a potentially worrying trend. If this pattern continues, then the formula for anyone playing Swansea becomes clear: foul early, and often. Not only will you grind the flow to a halt, but you’ll end up enjoying a numerical advantage as a reward for your sabotage.
Facing that kind of eventuality, Monk is right to call out the strange decisions he’s seen as of late. If nothing else, he has an obligation to protect his players from the threat of injury, and with a trip to Stoke up next on the docket, it’s perhaps a wise move to bring his recent observations to the FA’s attention. He also has to somehow stop the flood of yellow cards, or else face the prospect of suiting up himself, as the combination of suspensions and injuries may leave his roster alarmingly thin.
But having a private word is one thing; is there really a need to go public? I have to say, something doesn’t sit right with me about the resulting headline. “Monk blames refs for Swans’ form” doesn’t exactly instill confidence, or give the supporters something to be excited about—especially considering that last week’s scapegoat was the actual grass on the pitch.
Yes, the refereeing in the last few matches has been, let’s say, as confusing as Louis van Gaal’s hairstyle, but it’s never a good sign when players and coaches start chalking up losses to the mercurial and unfailingly bewildering mind of refs.
The calls are always going to seem horrible from each person’s point of view; the only hope is that over the course of 38 games the bad calls even themselves out. But even if they don’t (and they never have seemed to for Swansea, who went all of the 2012/2013 season without being awarded a penalty kick), if the game comes down to one or two shrug-worthy decisions, then you really have no right to complain, since such rolls of the dice are, well, rolls of dice after all.
In conclusion, Monk’s not wrong, but perhaps he should spend more time analyzing his substitution strategy and less time replaying every foul. Or, is blowing two leads at home to a team who hasn’t scored an away goal since March a problem for the referees?
More strong stuff from Eric there, and considering one of the reasons Monk gave for the loss was "it was too easy in possession" I definitely think there's something in keeping his comments strictly football-related. What's your take? Do you think we've been harshly treated by officials?