The second half was pretty chaotic. Luton bossed the first 25 minutes or so, with good chances, and I felt we were going to concede every time they broke forward. Home fans don’t think they’ve got many decent players, but Walsh, Lawrence, Kodua and Johnson all looked decent. They created a couple of big chances, but fewer than you might think, just three before a great Sonny Bradley block on 73 minutes from Jordan Clark. That was pretty much it for Luton’s attacking threat, aside from the goal that wasn’t given.
Jack Wilshere wasn’t happy with the referee, and I can almost see why. The ‘foul’ by Wells on Wickens ruled out a goal for them, and on the replays, it’s not obvious. At the time I thought it was fair enough, but looking back, there is maybe contact between the two. Enough to send Wickens sprawling? That’s not for me to answer. Scott Oldham had a tough second half, and while this is debatable, not much else was.
While Wilshere ended by criticising the referee, it’s worth noting they committed 13 fouls, Naismith with four and Bramall with four, and got just one yellow card, while we committed 21 fouls, Varfolomeev with four and Hamer with four, and got five yellow cards. I’m not complaining, by the way, most looked justified, but Nigel Lonwijk certainly deserved one for his foul on Rob Street, retribution for an earlier foul by Street on him.
It wasn’t game-changing, of course, but the referee took a lot of stick from the home support, who also forget that Naismith escaped a booking for ripping Draper’s shirt from his back in the lead up to the second goal, and that he’d previously given a foul on their keeper for what looked like a simple aerial challenge with Tom Hamer in the first half. I know they were angry at some of our game slowing tactics, and that’s the pantomime of football, but Hamer takes our throws, and he has to come from right centre back to the left corner for some, it is going to take time. Unless there is a rule that says you have to have the closest player take a throw in, which there isn’t, then it’s not breaching the rules.
The last 20 belonged to us, and remarkably, despite a bench featuring two keepers, a defender likely to exit and a player who couldn’t get in for Grimsby Borough two weeks ago, we found the extra gear rather than the home side. A late Towler header from a corner could have snatched us all three points, while Erik Ring also fashioned a late chance.
2-2 was seemingly fair, and while the xG gave us a slight lead, 1.81 to 1.71, it was a game of four quarters in which either side could have won it. I can understand, but not agree with the home side’s frustrations, but therein lies the beauty of football. Had VAR gone to their disallowed goal, it may have allowed it, it may not, but surely that’s part of the appeal at this level? It why I prefer Kenilworth Road to Anfield, while I would rather watch Lincoln and Luton than Man City and Man Utd. Also, I’m not just saying that because we got a point when we might not have got any, I tweeted earlier in the week I’d rather lose and have no VAR than with with it.
I know this reignites the ‘is it a good point if you’re 2-0 up’ argument, but football is about more than an opinion based on game state. Would we have taken a point before the game? Yes. So therefore, it has to be a good point. Those who argue it isn’t will also tell you think like xG doesn’t matter, all that matters is the result, but then when the result doesn’t go their way, it’s all about game state and how the game panned out. At least when I’m hypocritical, I own it.
For me, there is context which changes. The 2-0 lead gave us a cushion, but they were always going to turn it on. They score goals, especially at home: four against Wycombe, three against Orient, even two against Stevenage who don’t concede many. They were always going to have their moment, so by building up two goals we were giving ourselves a cushion. Also, we had a bench that was weaker than the tea I make in the morning, with four players who were highly unlikely to get on the field barring an absolute disaster (Pardington, Montsma, Okewoye and Jeacock).
They had a host of huge talents who didn’t get on, but could easily have started for us such as one time £7m man George Saville. Reuell Walters and Christ Makosso could have freshened us up late on, but we looked threadbare. That matters when it comes to building a lead, especially when you approach relies heavily on stamina, fitness and hard work, as ours does.
For me, this is a good point, and unusually, I think 95% of the fan base probably agrees with that. When you go to a ground you’ve only won at once in 17 visits through history, facing a team with a much bigger budget supported by parachute payments, and with a bench featuring very few options to shake it up later on, I think a draw is a great point, however you get it.