This messageboard is for Adults 18 years and over.
If you are under this age please leave the board.

Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any other content posted on it.

Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.

What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks. If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place.

Any potentially libellous comments that might jeopardise the future of this messageboard will therefore be deleted, and the person posting them will receive a ban.Enjoy.

    I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

    Posted by The Outsider on 20/2/2024, 0:24:25

    Rasmus Hojlund (Manchester United): Hojlund's first goal in the 2-1 victory at Luton smacked of a player bang in form and his second was just stunning improvisation. Luton players were left waving their hands in the air appealing to the referee that Hojlund had somehow used his arms and not his chest to direct the ball into the net but that was nothing more than sheer desperation and they knew it.

    Manchester United left Kenilworth Road having done enough but should have won this game by a street. A run of seven goals in six games suggests Hojlund has found his wings and is starting to fly. The youngster also looks like he's made of tough stuff. He's come through a very difficult period at the club and it must have been painful.

    However, it looks as if the United fans might have a new hero, and the club a new Frank Stapleton!

      Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

      Posted by MG on 20/2/2024, 9:15:08, in reply to "I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

      Does anyone think he really meant the second? Feels a bit generous and you can see from his reaction that he hadn't been at all sure where it was heading, he was just trying to keep a shot going wide in play.

        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

        Posted by Doctor Ince on 20/2/2024, 9:55:56, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

        I was talking to a mate about this last night.

        I think he's trying to play it back across the box. There's a deliberate movement so he's trying to play the ball rather than just letting it hit him.

        If he meant it it's a great finish but for me he's just trying to get it back into danger

          Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

          Posted by Music Critic on 20/2/2024, 9:57:44, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

          Yeah agree

          I like Hojlund (spelling?) though even if his 2nd might have been a bit fortunate. Good player

            Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

            Posted by MG on 20/2/2024, 10:17:26, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

            Agreed with you both on all counts, it was a good reaction but I'm pretty sure he wasn't particularly aiming at scoring.

        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

        Posted by David Coote on 20/2/2024, 8:44:39, in reply to "I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

        Small club syndrome strikes again. Man Utd should have won 6:1.
        I have no time for Luton Town tbh.

        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

        Posted by Caught Jester on 20/2/2024, 7:40:18, in reply to "I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

        But should have won this game by a street ?

        To think - that clown got paid for writing that shit..

          Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

          Posted by Doctor Ince on 20/2/2024, 8:53:13, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

          He's not wrong though...they went through one on one three times and on another day they score them.

          It was a strange game in that both 5-1 and 2-2 would've been fair results

            Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

            Posted by The Questioner on 20/2/2024, 13:33:51, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

            I agree to an extent, however…
            If you have a look at the stats at half time we had more possession, more shots on goal and more on target but were 2:1 down.
            Ten Hag changed it around in the second half and they looked much more solid but there chances were pretty much all from break aways.( which they could have and should have scored a couple).
            I very rarely complain about the ref as was one for a while and it’s bloody hard, but he had a really bad game.
            1- I think it was Macguires 6th foul before he got booked.
            2- Don’t agree the Casemiro’s first booking was harsh …Belll skipped past him and had a really good run on the defence.No doubt the second was a booking…easiest decision ever…only he knows why he bottled it.
            3- Townsend got booked for a trip on the edge of the box pretty much straight away …Evans did the same to him 2 minutes later on the half way line …no booking .
            Numerous other decisions which left most of us baffled…extra time being one of them although I believe that’s the 4th officials job.

              Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

              Posted by Music Critic on 20/2/2024, 8:56:31, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

              The implication is clear, though. That whoever wrote that shite is saying they were by far the better side. And that was not the case. In fact, from the quarter of an hour mark, it could be argued we were the better side. They were always going to get chances as we were chasing the game

              We missed chances too

                Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                Posted by Reflection on 20/2/2024, 9:20:44, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                The Man U keeper had one save to make, he let it in. Thats the realism, whilst Kam and a last ditch block kept good chances out. We had good possession huffed and puffed but didn't work the keeper. Disappointing to have that possession with no end result.United looked to have us in trouble on several counter attacks. Proud of our performance but we need to be honest.

                  Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                  Posted by Music Critic on 20/2/2024, 9:33:07, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                  Ten Haag himself said they gave up too many chances. The fact the keeper was underworked was down to wayward finishing

                  Anyway that wasn't really my point. 'United should have won by a street...' is a stupid misrepresentation of how the game went

                    Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                    Posted by Bored in Flitwick on 20/2/2024, 9:29:38, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                    Think with Elijah on pitch.we may have done better..crosses into the box second half.i feel sure his presence would have improved it for us...also..no mention in that article about what should have been two yellows for manure player

                      Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                      Posted by MG on 20/2/2024, 9:28:11, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                      It was a lump in the pitch that stopped Woodrow once in each half then?

                      We didn't twice fire just wide with the keeper beaten in the first half?

                      We didn't hit the bar at the end?

                      Osho didn't have a free header from a corner and a great chance on the six yard box which he scuffed?

                      We didn't put twenty odd crosses in in the second half and we didn't have 22 shots on goal then?

                      Blimey, my memory really is bad . . .

                        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                        Posted by Reflection on 20/2/2024, 9:41:12, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                        And the keeper didn't have to save one of them. Where as our keeper?
                        We gave a good performance, no denying that, but without Kam and Lakonga at the top of their game, things could have easily got very difficult.

                          Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                          Posted by MG on 20/2/2024, 9:49:31, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                          And without Hoijland and Evans at the top of theirs and without the ref being so weak . . .

                          What's so hard about accepting that we put in a good performance and probably deserved better out of the game?

                            Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                            Posted by Doctor Ince on 20/2/2024, 9:59:35, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                            Both are true.

                            We had a good game and probably deserved more.

                            They could and should have scored more than they did.

                            We put 20 odd crosses in and I don't think one troubled them too much.

                            We hit the bar at the end but the top of the bar, it always looked like it was going over.

                            Agree on the rest with poor finishing, we have to make Onana work more there.

                              Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                              Posted by MG on 20/2/2024, 10:15:54, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                              Yes indeed both are true. Most games would come out very different if one team took all their chances and the other missed all theirs.

                              But Doughty's effort just wide of the post with the keeper beaten is as decent a finish as one that's straight at the keeper isn't it? Both are as close to scoring. Likewise Barclay's is only just over a foot or so from a goal, just like the ones straight at Kaminski.

                              Sorry but I think a draw would have been a fair result, especially when you take the ref's failings into account.

                              It was an excellent game of football.

                                Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                Posted by Doctor Ince on 20/2/2024, 10:52:52, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                I think hitting the target is a better attempt than missing in Doughty's situation.

                                If you hit the target there's a chance the keeper makes a mistake and it goes in (and it's Onana in goal). If you miss then you miss.

                                Barkley's was unlucky really, not too much more he could've done from there.

                                  Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                  Posted by The Outsider on 20/2/2024, 11:26:46, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                  ...or you could shoot wide and it gets deflected (deliberately or otherwise) into the goal.

                                    Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                    Posted by Doctor Ince on 20/2/2024, 13:46:51, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                    But yes, always a possibility.

                                    So is getting it on target and it taking a deflection to beat the keeper.

                                    Overall point is it's better to hit the target than not

                                      Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                      Posted by Doctor Ince on 20/2/2024, 13:46:08, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                      Very unlikely from Doughty's shot, which is what I was referring to specifically.

                                        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                        Posted by MG on 20/2/2024, 12:03:56, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                        Not likely, I mean when was the last time you saw that happen?

                                        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                        Posted by MG on 20/2/2024, 11:00:52, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                        Reasonable point but I think our players actually produced the better finishes because just that foot or so and the keeper had no chance with them.

                                        But that's one we could argue all day so let's break the habits of a lifetime .

                                  Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                  Posted by Music Critic on 20/2/2024, 9:45:41, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                  So, you're saying that it isn't a chance if the keeper doesn't make a save? Strange take

                                  Yes, if they'd made it 3-1 it could have got difficult but, if we're talking ifs and buts, IF we'd have made it 2-2 we'd have gone on to win the game 'cos they were very uncomfortable.

                                    Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                    Posted by Reflection on 20/2/2024, 11:19:02, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                    Don't think I said that at all,and you know I didnt say that. We can't make it 2-2 if we don't work the keeper.
                                    No one is saying it was a bad performance, quite the opposite, but be realistic on the chances on goal from both sides.

                                      Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                                      Posted by Music Critic on 20/2/2024, 11:42:59, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                                      You did say that. That is EXACTLY what you're saying and you've doubled-down on it in your latest post.

                                      You might not think that's what you're saying but you are. You're saying their chances were more worthy cos they landed on target is a right weird way of looking at it and ours don't really count cos they didn't go on target

                                      If you were making a point about our poor finishing, I'd agree. But you are saying that we didn't create chances. When we obviously did

                            Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                            Posted by Doctor Ince on 20/2/2024, 9:13:49, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                            He doesn't watch the games though...at most he'd have seen the two minute highlights. From that alone United probably should've comfortably won.

                            The handball comment is laughable though, it was clearly an appeal for offside

                              Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                              Posted by Ches Fordroad on 20/2/2024, 9:25:24, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                              I doubt the stupid fat cunt even bothers with the highlights.

                              A quick scan of the scores and scorers gets most of his team then chuck in a couple of random names from the big clubs to make it up to 11 if needed.

                              Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                              Posted by The Outsider on 20/2/2024, 9:01:59, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                              Whoever wrote that shite.

                              It was our number one fan, Garth.

                          Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide

                          Posted by Northeasthatter on 20/2/2024, 7:12:36, in reply to "I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                          He meant to guide that back across the box really u can tell. If he meant to score than fair play but it had no pace and it beats the players by luck. Barkley could of got to that at the back post it just looked all slow 🐌

                            Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                            Posted by The Outsider on 20/2/2024, 0:25:07, in reply to "I assumed that they were appealing for offsiide"

                            ...or even offside

                              Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                              Posted by crumpsall on 20/2/2024, 0:39:46, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                              I went for offside. But someone said Bell, on the ground, played him onside. As for improvisation, just been out with two very reasonable and decent United mates who reckoned it was a brilliant move with the chest to score. Fair enough in my book.

                              What beat us yesterday was in my opinion the injury to Elijah in the warm up. Just knocked our system.

                              I am utterly fucked off with us being 'noble losers'. We are so much better than that.

                                Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                                Posted by Doctor Ince on 20/2/2024, 10:01:36, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                                Agree with the last para.

                                We're our own worst enemy at times.

                                  Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                                  Posted by Music Critic on 20/2/2024, 8:05:07, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                                  Your last para is spot on

                                  We're killing ourselves at the moment with errors. Everyone makes mistakes but we're making too many. It's undermining the fact that we are good enough to survive

                                    Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                                    Posted by MG on 20/2/2024, 9:23:10, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                                    Yes, we have had a few very, very good goals scored against us that you just have to accept, eg Wolves, Palace, Burnley at home but so many of them have come from errors or simply switching off.

                                    But that's the Premier League I guess, just switching off for a moment from defending a throw near the box is all some of these players need to open you up. Tough ask for a bargain basement team not to make mistakes given the constant pressure they are up against.

                                    What I love though is that in periods in games we have had teams like Chelsea and Man United clinging on to leads for dear life and in the case of United having to hack us down repeatedly to keep us at bay. As crumps says, we deserve better but it has been beautiful to watch those periods of the games.

                                      Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                                      Posted by Toddingtonsteve on 20/2/2024, 8:31:37, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                                      Your last paragraph is spot on, if we can get through the next 6 games without a defender making a stupid mistake we’ll be well out imo

                                        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                                        Posted by PG on 20/2/2024, 8:43:41, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                                        Your last paragraph is spot on. If we can do that against the teams down there with us we will be ok.

                                      Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                                      Posted by The Outsider on 20/2/2024, 1:08:40, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                                      From behind the goal, I wondered about offside. Certainly never even gave it a thought that here was a handball. I must say that, at the game, I thought that it hit him and he knew nothing about it but, having seen it again, he took it very well.

                                      I agree about Eli although, obviously, the first minute goal shook us - the annoying thing is that the referee got in the way of our attack which led to their breakaway.

                                      David Coote is never too far away from controversy when he referees us.

                                      That incident plus bottling the red card for Casemiro.

                                      Debatable penalties for both sides at Brighton on the opening day.

                                      Chelsea scoring with two balls on the pitch.

                                      Wrongly disallowing our second goal in the first ten minutes at home to Portsmouth which would have put us 2-0 in front but they came back to win 3-1.

                                      Letting Sam Saunders off with a yellow card for a bad tackle on Elliot Lee who had scored twice in the 3-2 home defeat against Wycombe.

                                      He was also in charge of the game at Newport where McBurnie scored a hat trick after coming on after about an hour although I don't suppose that we can blame him for that one.

                                        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                                        Posted by Ches Fordroad on 20/2/2024, 8:07:38, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                                        "Letting Sam Saunders off with a yellow card for a bad tackle on Elliot Lee who had scored twice in the 3-2 home defeat against Wycombe"

                                        I bet the useless bastard was at least 5 minutes short of the correct amount of added time that night too.

                                        At least karma caught up with Seven Second Sammy at Wembley

                                        Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside

                                        Posted by The Mayor of Rudebury on 20/2/2024, 0:45:11, in reply to "Re: I assumed that they were appealing for offside"

                                        Seconded. I believe we’re gonna come out on top again soon though.

                                        Barkley’s layoff to Woodrow in the first half - Eli would very likely have put that away. Likewise Alfie’s cross that Woodrow missed in the second half.

                                  [ Luton Outlaws - The Avenue of Evil ]

                                  DISCLAIMER

                                  The posts made on this board are the opinions of the people posting them and do not always reflect the opinion of the board administration.

                                  Luton Outlaws is a totally independent forum, paid for and run by supporters of Luton Town and is not associated with Luton Town Football Club, lutontown.co.uk, lutonfc.com, Loyal Luton Supporters Club, Trust in Luton, Luton Town Supporters Club or anyone else for that matter and is declared a 100% Tombola Free Zone.

                                    Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any other content posted on it. Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.

                                    What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks. If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place. Enjoy. Admin contact - dilligaf.outlaws@gmail.com.

                                  eXTReMe Tracker