Oxford United in a spot of bother after being sunk by controversial penalty

Ryan Williams sums up the mood around the Kassam Stadium as he misses a good chance in the second half as Oxford United lost 1-0 to fellow play-off hopefuls York City

Ryan Williams sums up the mood around the Kassam Stadium as he misses a good chance in the second half as Oxford United lost 1-0 to fellow play-off hopefuls York City

First published in Sport Oxford Mail: Photograph of the Author by , Chief Sports Reporter covering Oxford United. Follow us on twitter: @oxfordmailoufc. Call me on 01865 425458

OXFORD United felt hard done by as their crunch meeting with fellow play-off hopefuls York City was decided by a hotly-contested penalty.

Dave Kitson was adjudged to have handled in the area, a moment missed by referee Oliver Langford, but awarded on the back of advice from assistant Jake Hillier.

Michael Coulson converted from 12 yards early in the second half to earn a 1-0 win for the Minstermen at the Kassam Stadium.

It could prove hugely costly for the U’s, whose place in the top seven was taken by City with only three games remaining.

Left back Tom Newey was left questioning the game’s key decision.

He said: “It’s disappointing to lose to one of your close rivals.

“I thought it was a very evenly-contested game, which got decided by a controversial decision.

“I always thought the rule was deliberate handball.

“If it deflects off someone’s leg on to their hand it’s not deliberate in my understanding.

“I don’t know what Dave Kitson is meant to do, how is that deliberate?”

Gary Waddock, like many inside the stadium, did not have a good view of the incident and had to ask his players afterwards what had happened.

The U’s boss was frustrated the side could not replicate their performance from beating Plymouth 2-0 a week earlier.

He said: “It looked as though it was going to be a 0-0 if I’m being honest, but the decision was tough on us.

“We’ve lost the game and we’re very disappointed.

“After the performance at Plymouth it was set up, but we’ve come off with a 1-0 defeat.

“York are a well-organised side, you can’t take that away from them.

“They have a very good manager in charge and they’ve come here, done a job on us and got a result.”

United struggled to move the ball quickly, which had been a feature of their success at Plymouth.

Midfielder Nicky Wroe felt the pitch made an impact.

He said: “Last week we played on a really nice surface and as you see out pitch is nowhere near that standard.

“You struggle to get that tempo when the pitch is not very good, because it doesn’t roll right.”

l Match report: Pages 38-39

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:01am Sat 19 Apr 14

howardl says...

Blaming the pitch!!!! shameful
Blaming the pitch!!!! shameful howardl
  • Score: 11

11:26am Sat 19 Apr 14

87oufc says...

Good teams will make the difference, regardless of 'should have, should not have' situations.
As a result of that I don't think we have what it takes to stay in the play-offs, well now it's a case of getting back into them - which I don't think we can.
The fact we have stayed top is in no part to our ability to play football. This has been a very very poor season for everyone
Good teams will make the difference, regardless of 'should have, should not have' situations. As a result of that I don't think we have what it takes to stay in the play-offs, well now it's a case of getting back into them - which I don't think we can. The fact we have stayed top is in no part to our ability to play football. This has been a very very poor season for everyone 87oufc
  • Score: 15

11:56am Sat 19 Apr 14

Manor Born says...

The pitch is the same for both sides. If anything, given that we play on said surface every week, it should be an advantage to us as we should be used to it.

The simple fact is we're not good enough, we're not creative enough, we're not clinical enough. The squad assembled by CW has proven itself to once again come up short when it really mattered. The manager may have changed, but this is still very much CW's squad. A squad designed to play bland, slow, unexpressive football. A squad designed to restrict the opposition and hope we get one more than they do.

Sides who play that way will rarely succeed and will always be found wanting when the teams who go for it & take the game to the opposition start to gain momentum. We were flattered by the inconsistencies of others during the first two-thirds of the season. We almost did enough and many of us believed we could maintain our position, sadly as in previous years, this was not to be.
The pitch is the same for both sides. If anything, given that we play on said surface every week, it should be an advantage to us as we should be used to it. The simple fact is we're not good enough, we're not creative enough, we're not clinical enough. The squad assembled by CW has proven itself to once again come up short when it really mattered. The manager may have changed, but this is still very much CW's squad. A squad designed to play bland, slow, unexpressive football. A squad designed to restrict the opposition and hope we get one more than they do. Sides who play that way will rarely succeed and will always be found wanting when the teams who go for it & take the game to the opposition start to gain momentum. We were flattered by the inconsistencies of others during the first two-thirds of the season. We almost did enough and many of us believed we could maintain our position, sadly as in previous years, this was not to be. Manor Born
  • Score: 16

2:48pm Sat 19 Apr 14

Oxford Realist says...

Manor Born wrote:
The pitch is the same for both sides. If anything, given that we play on said surface every week, it should be an advantage to us as we should be used to it.

The simple fact is we're not good enough, we're not creative enough, we're not clinical enough. The squad assembled by CW has proven itself to once again come up short when it really mattered. The manager may have changed, but this is still very much CW's squad. A squad designed to play bland, slow, unexpressive football. A squad designed to restrict the opposition and hope we get one more than they do.

Sides who play that way will rarely succeed and will always be found wanting when the teams who go for it & take the game to the opposition start to gain momentum. We were flattered by the inconsistencies of others during the first two-thirds of the season. We almost did enough and many of us believed we could maintain our position, sadly as in previous years, this was not to be.
Here are the facts. We have played the top seven sides home and away thirteen times this season. We have won once, drawn three times and lost nine. Six points out of a possible thirty nine. Enough said I think.
[quote][p][bold]Manor Born[/bold] wrote: The pitch is the same for both sides. If anything, given that we play on said surface every week, it should be an advantage to us as we should be used to it. The simple fact is we're not good enough, we're not creative enough, we're not clinical enough. The squad assembled by CW has proven itself to once again come up short when it really mattered. The manager may have changed, but this is still very much CW's squad. A squad designed to play bland, slow, unexpressive football. A squad designed to restrict the opposition and hope we get one more than they do. Sides who play that way will rarely succeed and will always be found wanting when the teams who go for it & take the game to the opposition start to gain momentum. We were flattered by the inconsistencies of others during the first two-thirds of the season. We almost did enough and many of us believed we could maintain our position, sadly as in previous years, this was not to be.[/p][/quote]Here are the facts. We have played the top seven sides home and away thirteen times this season. We have won once, drawn three times and lost nine. Six points out of a possible thirty nine. Enough said I think. Oxford Realist
  • Score: 21

5:41pm Sat 19 Apr 14

Manor Born says...

Oxford Realist wrote:
Manor Born wrote:
The pitch is the same for both sides. If anything, given that we play on said surface every week, it should be an advantage to us as we should be used to it.

The simple fact is we're not good enough, we're not creative enough, we're not clinical enough. The squad assembled by CW has proven itself to once again come up short when it really mattered. The manager may have changed, but this is still very much CW's squad. A squad designed to play bland, slow, unexpressive football. A squad designed to restrict the opposition and hope we get one more than they do.

Sides who play that way will rarely succeed and will always be found wanting when the teams who go for it & take the game to the opposition start to gain momentum. We were flattered by the inconsistencies of others during the first two-thirds of the season. We almost did enough and many of us believed we could maintain our position, sadly as in previous years, this was not to be.
Here are the facts. We have played the top seven sides home and away thirteen times this season. We have won once, drawn three times and lost nine. Six points out of a possible thirty nine. Enough said I think.
And that right there is the crux of the matter and says more about our team than any other post on here.
[quote][p][bold]Oxford Realist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Manor Born[/bold] wrote: The pitch is the same for both sides. If anything, given that we play on said surface every week, it should be an advantage to us as we should be used to it. The simple fact is we're not good enough, we're not creative enough, we're not clinical enough. The squad assembled by CW has proven itself to once again come up short when it really mattered. The manager may have changed, but this is still very much CW's squad. A squad designed to play bland, slow, unexpressive football. A squad designed to restrict the opposition and hope we get one more than they do. Sides who play that way will rarely succeed and will always be found wanting when the teams who go for it & take the game to the opposition start to gain momentum. We were flattered by the inconsistencies of others during the first two-thirds of the season. We almost did enough and many of us believed we could maintain our position, sadly as in previous years, this was not to be.[/p][/quote]Here are the facts. We have played the top seven sides home and away thirteen times this season. We have won once, drawn three times and lost nine. Six points out of a possible thirty nine. Enough said I think.[/p][/quote]And that right there is the crux of the matter and says more about our team than any other post on here. Manor Born
  • Score: 6

10:50pm Sat 19 Apr 14

Doctor69 says...

Oxford Realist wrote:
Manor Born wrote:
The pitch is the same for both sides. If anything, given that we play on said surface every week, it should be an advantage to us as we should be used to it.

The simple fact is we're not good enough, we're not creative enough, we're not clinical enough. The squad assembled by CW has proven itself to once again come up short when it really mattered. The manager may have changed, but this is still very much CW's squad. A squad designed to play bland, slow, unexpressive football. A squad designed to restrict the opposition and hope we get one more than they do.

Sides who play that way will rarely succeed and will always be found wanting when the teams who go for it & take the game to the opposition start to gain momentum. We were flattered by the inconsistencies of others during the first two-thirds of the season. We almost did enough and many of us believed we could maintain our position, sadly as in previous years, this was not to be.
Here are the facts. We have played the top seven sides home and away thirteen times this season. We have won once, drawn three times and lost nine. Six points out of a possible thirty nine. Enough said I think.
Great way of highlighting the issue. I really didn't know our record was so poor.
[quote][p][bold]Oxford Realist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Manor Born[/bold] wrote: The pitch is the same for both sides. If anything, given that we play on said surface every week, it should be an advantage to us as we should be used to it. The simple fact is we're not good enough, we're not creative enough, we're not clinical enough. The squad assembled by CW has proven itself to once again come up short when it really mattered. The manager may have changed, but this is still very much CW's squad. A squad designed to play bland, slow, unexpressive football. A squad designed to restrict the opposition and hope we get one more than they do. Sides who play that way will rarely succeed and will always be found wanting when the teams who go for it & take the game to the opposition start to gain momentum. We were flattered by the inconsistencies of others during the first two-thirds of the season. We almost did enough and many of us believed we could maintain our position, sadly as in previous years, this was not to be.[/p][/quote]Here are the facts. We have played the top seven sides home and away thirteen times this season. We have won once, drawn three times and lost nine. Six points out of a possible thirty nine. Enough said I think.[/p][/quote]Great way of highlighting the issue. I really didn't know our record was so poor. Doctor69
  • Score: 0

11:17pm Sat 19 Apr 14

The Black Prince was off-side says...

Great comments that the club need to read and understand. On top of that we have two oh so average full backs both of which think themselves better than they are. Hunt's interview after the last home defeat was breath taking in its arrogance when he had just put in an awful performance. Only when Connolly played close to Beano did we look anything close to having a shape that could threaten.
Great comments that the club need to read and understand. On top of that we have two oh so average full backs both of which think themselves better than they are. Hunt's interview after the last home defeat was breath taking in its arrogance when he had just put in an awful performance. Only when Connolly played close to Beano did we look anything close to having a shape that could threaten. The Black Prince was off-side
  • Score: 1

8:52am Sun 20 Apr 14

JamesHinch says...

Yes agree with most of the above. Pitch was same for both sides and to be honest I thought it was a penalty at the time and the FL show proved it I'm afraid.
Expect a reaction at Scunny. Will need 7 points from 3 games I think and thankfully 2 are away.
Yes agree with most of the above. Pitch was same for both sides and to be honest I thought it was a penalty at the time and the FL show proved it I'm afraid. Expect a reaction at Scunny. Will need 7 points from 3 games I think and thankfully 2 are away. JamesHinch
  • Score: 0

10:37am Sun 20 Apr 14

bigchet says...

did not see game live but it sounded very even on the radio, but seeing highlights we had enough chances to win. playoffs look out of reach now but you never know, there have been some surprising results lately so maybe we could get an unlikely win if we go to scunthorpe and really go for it as nothing less than a win will do.
did not see game live but it sounded very even on the radio, but seeing highlights we had enough chances to win. playoffs look out of reach now but you never know, there have been some surprising results lately so maybe we could get an unlikely win if we go to scunthorpe and really go for it as nothing less than a win will do. bigchet
  • Score: 1

11:28am Sun 20 Apr 14

BigCrompy says...

Funnily enough I think we'll go to Scunny and nick a win - it would be just the sort of contrary thing we'd do. Comfortably beat Stanley, and then utterly screw things up at Sixfields, where Wilder becomes worshipped as the new messiah.

Even seventh place, regarded in some eyes as the golden chalice, must be regarded as abject considering how comfortably we were in the top 3 for 4-5 months. I'll reserve judgement for two more weeks, but...C- season at best, and we really do deserve much, much better than this arrogant garbage.
Funnily enough I think we'll go to Scunny and nick a win - it would be just the sort of contrary thing we'd do. Comfortably beat Stanley, and then utterly screw things up at Sixfields, where Wilder becomes worshipped as the new messiah. Even seventh place, regarded in some eyes as the golden chalice, must be regarded as abject considering how comfortably we were in the top 3 for 4-5 months. I'll reserve judgement for two more weeks, but...C- season at best, and we really do deserve much, much better than this arrogant garbage. BigCrompy
  • Score: 1

4:47pm Sun 20 Apr 14

oldun says...

JamesHinch wrote:
Yes agree with most of the above. Pitch was same for both sides and to be honest I thought it was a penalty at the time and the FL show proved it I'm afraid.
Expect a reaction at Scunny. Will need 7 points from 3 games I think and thankfully 2 are away.
What!!! You are jesting . It was blasted at his hand from close range . Absolutely not a pen - either on FL show or from North Stand .
[quote][p][bold]JamesHinch[/bold] wrote: Yes agree with most of the above. Pitch was same for both sides and to be honest I thought it was a penalty at the time and the FL show proved it I'm afraid. Expect a reaction at Scunny. Will need 7 points from 3 games I think and thankfully 2 are away.[/p][/quote]What!!! You are jesting . It was blasted at his hand from close range . Absolutely not a pen - either on FL show or from North Stand . oldun
  • Score: 2

4:48pm Sun 20 Apr 14

YellowRose says...

The players just need diving lessons! Penalties galore given this weekend.
The players just need diving lessons! Penalties galore given this weekend. YellowRose
  • Score: 1

4:49pm Sun 20 Apr 14

oldun says...

BigCrompy wrote:
Funnily enough I think we'll go to Scunny and nick a win - it would be just the sort of contrary thing we'd do. Comfortably beat Stanley, and then utterly screw things up at Sixfields, where Wilder becomes worshipped as the new messiah.

Even seventh place, regarded in some eyes as the golden chalice, must be regarded as abject considering how comfortably we were in the top 3 for 4-5 months. I'll reserve judgement for two more weeks, but...C- season at best, and we really do deserve much, much better than this arrogant garbage.
Very poor division. We must be much stronger next season - whichever division we are in. We will win tomorrow
[quote][p][bold]BigCrompy[/bold] wrote: Funnily enough I think we'll go to Scunny and nick a win - it would be just the sort of contrary thing we'd do. Comfortably beat Stanley, and then utterly screw things up at Sixfields, where Wilder becomes worshipped as the new messiah. Even seventh place, regarded in some eyes as the golden chalice, must be regarded as abject considering how comfortably we were in the top 3 for 4-5 months. I'll reserve judgement for two more weeks, but...C- season at best, and we really do deserve much, much better than this arrogant garbage.[/p][/quote]Very poor division. We must be much stronger next season - whichever division we are in. We will win tomorrow oldun
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree