The ref got it wrong, got it right, got it wrong

In the aftermath of the derby match, I thought I'd let the dust, the inquest and my thoughts settle before returning to the blog. The events of late in the first held decided a game that has looked to be flowing, passing attack against stuttering nervous defence up until then.

I was impressed with Newcastle's composure and their passing game was looking like controlling the game, even though they hadn't created any solid chances in the first half. Sunderland didn't turn up, either in terms of quality or passion and it looked quite ominous for them as half time approached.

Injury prompted changes up front and I'm defence. O'Shea leaving to be replaced by Coates made the back line look even creakier - if that was possible. Defoe on for Toivonen was a move that added more than it took away. Defoe had a point to prove and came in full of a work rate that Toivonen seemed to lack.

The first incident from my headline was the lack of a penalty for a blatant Jack Colback handball. The referee seemed perfectly positioned but didn't give it. Colback had his hands raised and this incident seems to have slipped under the radar in the aftermath of the next one. The Coloccini foul was a definite penalty - no attempt to play the ball and a clear, silly foul. So I think that the ref got this one right. But the decision to send Coloccini off was wrong, in my view. It was a foul but a penalty felt like it was enough.

So, the future. It looks brighter for Newcastle, based on their ability to retain the ball. Sunderland struggled with pace, intensity, passing, organisation, passion and ball retention. Big Sam has some real work to do in the training ground to get his ideas across. The team needs to pick up points regularly before the transfer window opens and he can buy.

Let's hope that there's something more to get out if these players because the evidence so far this season suggests they are in real trouble.

How can so many managers 'lose the dressing room?'

Its just after half time, on Saturday 14th March 2015 and Sunderland are 0-4 down at home to Aston Villa, who are in the bottom three. Gus Poyet lost the majority of the fans with an attack on them earlier in the year, and now appears to have list the dressing room.

Yet another Sunderland manager faces the sack after finding that the team don't buy into his ideas and don't seem remotely interested in the pitch. The club look destined for relegation to the Chsmpionship, again. I haven't forgotten that the situation 12 months ago was far, far worse and they survived but lightning won't strike twice.

It's the fact that the team don't appear to have bought into Poyet's philosophy, possibly brought about by following the philosophy all season and getting previous little out of it. The style of play that he wants to put forward is possession over everything else. If points were awarded for possession statistics then Sunderland would be safe already. The real issue here is the fact that, the season after the players revolted against Paolo Di Canio, the players are not performing for Gus Poyet. The effort and concentration levels have been dire, and this is summed up by the fact that Seb Larsson didn't arrive in the pitch until 3 minutes into the second half - farcical.

Rumours have circulated about a large number of the Sunderland squad that are heavy drinkers and poor trainers. Add to this the recent run ins with the law of Nicklas Bendtner, Titus Bramble, Connor Wickham and Adam Johnson and Poyet's comments last year about a rotten core at the club come into more focus-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2603755/Gus-Poyet-hints-rotten-core-Sunderland-boss-refuses-rule-leaving-Black-Cats.html

I'm not sure who would want the job, and anyone who takes it would probably want to conduct a complete overhaul of the playing squad to root out this rogue element. I can't think of many first team players that is want to keep, and Ellis Short will have to dig deep again to help the club start again.

Does the game need "characters" or are we fine without them?

I've always seen quotes, usually in the tabloid press, that the game of football needs characters. That the likes of Mario Balotelli are "good for the game" as they keep up the interest level, create headlines and make the game more interesting. They say that the negative antics of Jose Mourinho where he attacks referees, other players, other managers and the authorities adds to the game because he is a character.

I completely disagree. I think that the phrase "bringing the game into disrepute" is wholly appropriate and I think that the lawmakers need to stamp down hard on all of these things.

I've been reading in my local newspaper this morning about Adam Johnson being arrested on suspicion of sex with a 15 year old girl. This man is a role model. With the outrageous riches he is paid, he owes the fans, his teammates, the club and the city a debt of representing them. I dread the conversation with my 8 and 6 year old boys when they ask why one of their favourite players is missing. When they ask why he's on Sky News instead of Sky Sports News.

I think that as a whole, football owes it's supporters. I don't expect all players to be angels all of the time but I don't think that it's too much to ask that they keep their heads down and work hard for the 15 to 20 years of the career, when they're paid huge sums of money to represent their club and fans.