Another game. Another defeat. Games to play are reducing. The Championship is waiting.
This was a game that City could have, should have had reasonable expectations of a point or 3 against a side on a poor run of form. Grant Hanley was missing with Covid with Gibson deputizing whilst Dean Smith elected for a midfield trio of Pierre Lees-Melou, Kenny McLean and Lukas Rupp.
From the very off, Leeds looked sharper, faster and more aggressive, snapping into tackles without giving the City players a moment on the ball. Frequently the tackles were on the wrong side of the rules but for 20 minutes it seemed that Stuart Atwell had left his cards in the dressing room.
Rodrigo first fouled Lees-Melou with a stamp on his foot and then two minutes later cleaned out Brandon Williams with what should have been a clear yellow. Williams was on the receiving end of some particularly brutal treatment, Forshaw next to go in studs showing onto the loanees ankle. Still nothing.
The net result was that the City midfield began to look almost afraid to receive the ball. Throughout the game, it was noticeable that the City players stood waiting for the ball to come to them when it was passed. Leeds made numerous interceptions and turnovers as a result.
When the players did get the ball, they rushed the passes meaning that although City shaded the possession in the opening third, they had little to show for it.
But then neither did Leeds. Apart from a corner, City had kept them largely at arm’s length until Leeds played a long ball forward. Bamford was up with Ben Gibson and Ozan Kabak chasing the ball but the Turk’s header was weak and fell to James. He rolled it into Rodrigo who hit a shot that hit Gibson’s back, deflecting it beyond the wrong-footed Tim Krul.
From the outset, it was obvious that Bamford was offside. Yet Mike Dean in Stockley Park deemed that he was not interfering with play, an utterly farcical decision.
So incensed were the Norwich technical team that referee Atwell finally remembered his yellow cards, brandishing it at goalkeeping coach Ed Wootten.
It is decisions like this that just make you think that the establishment will be only too glad to see the back of City in the Premier League so its place can go to a more lucrative opponent.
Leeds were lifted by the goal and began to cut through the City midfield with ease, and get around the fullbacks. Williams was caught several times losing possession in an advanced position exposing the flank to the quick United counter-thrusts.
On 27 minutes, another frankly baffling VAR review. Ayling slid in on Rashica. It was a hard, aggressive slide from a distance back. His studs were up, foot off the floor catching Milot Rashica just below the knee sending him rolling to the floor, albeit exaggerated as is the modern way.
Atwell showed a yellow but the tackle went to Stockley Park for review. Here in the US, the pundits were in no doubt that it was a straight red. It wasn’t given.
Meanwhile, Leeds were knocking on the door. Bamford shot over after Gibson dithered on the ball and Struik somehow blazed over from a few yards after a great Krul save. Most bizarrely of all, £17m man Rahpinha had the goal gaping but somehow he missed with his striking foot, hit it with his back foot only for the ball to hit his striking foot again.
Meanwhile, City huffed and puffed. Josh Sargent, for all his running, looked short of pace on the right. Max Aarons made a few good runs, likewise Rashica, but time after time the final ball was woeful. At halftime, the only bright spot was that it was only 1-0.
Smith brought Mathias Normann on at halftime. Rupp had looked well out of his comfort zone in the first half but realistically, Smith could have withdrawn any of the three midfielders.
The result was that City looked marginally more composed in the middle of the pitch. Normann was fouled on the right and Rashica curled a wicked free-kick in between the defence and the keeper. It only needed a touch but through a crowd of players, somehow Leeds bustled it clear.
Shortly after, the ball was played to Rashica. He was stationary, waiting once again for the ball to reach him and inevitably was dispossessed by the onrushing Leeds players. The ball was hit long again, Krul was quickly off his line but when the ball was played back in he could do nothing to stop the goal. However, this time a clear off side was spotted and the effort disallowed.
On 60 minutes, Sargent made way for Jon Rowe, giving the youngster a decent spell to attempt to influence the game. It was the start of City’s best period of the game. Rowe first had a slightly weak shot saved, then another hit the bar – although there was an offside somewhere that would have ruled out a goal.
As a sidebar, Aarons and substitute Harrison had taken an instant dislike to each other. The Leeds man deeming it acceptable to push, shove and foul at every opportunity. Aarons was not to be bowed and gave back as good as he was given, the outcome being a yellow apiece over a period of 10 or 15 minutes.
On 75, City finally looked to have a change of luck. Good work on the right put Teemu Pukki through but good defending forced him wide before he could get a shot in. He pulled the ball back to Rashica. Again, Ayling slid in from a distance. Rashica went down and a penalty was awarded… however it went to review.
The replay showed that Ayling made contact with neither player nor ball, but that as Rashica ran, he trod on the outstretched leg and fell.
Mike Dean invited Atwell to the monitor to review the decision and it was reversed. On another day you may be reflective and say it could be awarded either way, but it just felt like another nail in the coffin for City.
Leeds then hit the crossbar from a free-kick and Harrison somehow escaped a second yellow after another tussle with Aarons. This seemed to prompt Smith to withdraw the full-back, bringing on Billy Gilmour and switching to three at the back.
And then it happened. Gibson played a great long ball forward to Pukki who played a first-time ball across the six-yard box where the onrushing McLean gleefully hit home to silence Elland Road.
It wasn’t quite for long though.
Another long ball forward. This time Gibson made a weak challenge and Raphinha was through. Krul rushed out and drove him wide but he was able to cut the ball back for Gerhardt to slot home.
Wild chaos amongst the home support.
The final few minutes of added time were frantic. Krul went up for a corner, played a beautiful ball to Pukki but his shot was saved. As Krul stayed up, Leeds broke but could not take advantage of the vacant net.
And that was it.
City were second best in almost every department, the players looking jaded, shell shocked and well off the pace. The introduction of Normann put a bit of bite back into the team in the second half but it took the introduction of Rowe to galvanise the team into serious action. Sargent looks some way off his best – surely Rowe must be a candidate to start in three weeks’ time?
This hasn’t quite reached Project Restart levels of dreadfulness, although that might be just the effect of having a crowd in the stadia. But it was dreadful nonetheless.
The only surprise is that City were only beaten by a solitary, illegitimate goal in the end.
Well James second best all over again but how we wasn’t playing ten or even nine after 30mins is a mystery to me and no review on rashicca foul in box either . Pukka should have equalized in last seconds really . Could say loads more but like the team can’t be bothered keep well mate 👍
The incident when the penalty was awarded, then overturned, is interesting. Ayling lunged in, didn’t make actual contact, but ended up with his leg where Rashica was stepping, with no chance of avoiding it. It clearly unbalanced Rashica, stepping on Ayling only happened because of Ayling’s lunge, so who committed a foul? Ayling didn’t get the ball, Rashica didn’t dive, his footing was unstable because of Ayling’s leg. It therefore wasn’t a clear and obvious error, so why VAR intervention?
I also thought the trip on Rashica in the first half was a clear penalty, but no VAR that time. The MOTD pundits thought that the fact that Bamford was deemed not to be interfering with play, while technically correct under the current guidance, was wrong, and that Kabak only headed it because he had no way of knowing whether Bamford was on or off – another instance of delaying linesmen putting the flag up straight away.
There’s a little bit of the yellow and green flame deep down inside of me. The only way I can keep it alight is to ignore the rest of the season and return afresh in the summer. I know not who can put Humpty Dumpty back together again and I have no pearls of wisdom to offer, just a sad exit stage left.
Side issue here James, but was anyone else baffled as to why Match of the Day didn’t show the Ayling foul on Rashica ?
I am watching the whole game for the first time later today before I comment but it really does have the whiff of bias.
Funnily enough my mate Trev said that he would bet that MOTD wouldn’t show it, but he was joking.
I think.
Just to remind our manager that when we played Sorensen,our only DM,in his natural position we won games. We seem to be having to rectify the poor team selection at half time.
McLean has played as a striker and would be a better option than Sargent in that position.
I think there are a large number of supporters who would agree with this. I cannot understand why he has not been selected again once he returned to fitness as he seemed to be pivotal in the games he played.
He’s one of the great mysteries this season. Looked reasonable when picked but neither manager has preferred him at all despite our weakness in that area. Nobody else has shone in midfield, so. either he’s unfit or isn’t actually as good as we want him to be. All a bit odd.
I’d consider myself a very level headed supporter. To begin, I’d like to say that on the balance of play, I believe we absolutely deserved to lose yesterday. As for the hows and whys, I’ll leave for others to ponder and post over. Instead, I want to highlight the coverage of yesterday’s game.
I watched the game via an American broadcaster, using English commentators and what I must assume is footage filmed and distributed by the Premier League. But even if it was the broadcaster themselves who decide what cameras to pick etc, the next point still stands: Norwich are always the bit-part player in the other team’s story. I’ve never seen this so obviously carried out than at Elland Road yesterday.
What do I mean by this? “Leeds need to win this”… “What will this win mean for Leeds”… (for the brief time we were level:) “What will this Norwich equaliser do to Leeds’ survival hopes…” the commentator and his Scottish pundit were only concerned about how anything that happened in the game affected Mighty Leeds. Honestly, it went on and on and on.
At about the 30 minute mark, I mentioned to others I was watching with that the broadcasters kept panning to Leeds fans, yet I hadn’t seen any Norwich fans. Okay, I was 10 minutes late, so there may have been an obligatory fan waving a yellow and green scarf in and around kick-off which I missed, but after that, not one City representative (apart from the two D Smiths) were shown on screen again. If you were watching the footage as a neutral, you would have assumed only one team’s fans were there.
Here’s how it played out:
Leeds score – cut to Leeds fans celebrating (fair enough).
Norwich awarded a penalty – cut to Leeds fans with heads in their hands.
Penalty overturned – cut to Leeds fans celebrating again.
Nervy 15 min spell in the second half where we hit the bar and have a few decent chances – constantly cut to Leeds fans biting their nails and/or cheering their side on.
Norwich score! Surely we’ll now see some scenes from the away end!? NOPE! More scenes of angst amongst the Leeds fans.
Leeds score a winner – They finally cut to Norwich fans looking dejected. Only joking, of course they didn’t! it was back to ‘absolute scenes’ of pandemonium in the stands.
I’m not one to usually buy into conspiracies but it’s hard to ignore the fact that on yesterday’s broadcast evidence, Norwich City just aren’t considered globally attractive enough for Brand Premier League. Does that then translate into dubious VAR calls not in our favour, and other questionable decisions going against Little Old Norwich? Hmmm…
Can’t argue with this. As a Leeds fan, I found all the hype about their return to ‘where they belong’ quite embarrassing and fully understand how fans of other clubs would feel. We’ve had MUFC stuffed down our throats for decades!
I’m not sure it’s only the stream you watched it on. Sky and BBC commentators are pretty much that way. We’re only there to make up the numbers.
Only when we were in the Championship and highlights were shown on Quest did we get any recognition.
One can only hope that when ITV show it (and us) next season, that the excellent Colin Murray is still in the chair. One of the very few who appreciate that we continue to live within our means, so are therefore most unwelcome in the PL..
O T B C
A rare away game for me yesterday. A bit like Liverpool in the cup where we played okay for the first quarter of an hour, fell to bits after the first goal and then had a Rowe inspired rally in the last twenty minutes. Thought the officials were poor for both sides and really didn’t get to grips with the game, but the VAR overturn was a real kick in the teeth (although had no view at the time to be sure either way). However, the ending was truly a horrible experience and perhaps the worst I’ve felt at a match for a long time. The atmosphere throughout felt very flat rather than angry and everyone seemed almost resigned to the fact that we wouldn’t get a victory.
I accepted before Christmas that we were going down, but for me yesterdays game sealed it. Rebuilding starts now as far as I’m concerned (on and off the pitch) so we can put this truly awful season behind us.