The Football Thread - Season 2011/2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
TriggerHappy said:
Have to congratulate Fulham for the way they fought back in the 2nd half. I do feel slightly aggrieved that Gervinho didn't receive a penalty for the incontestable trip in the box once he stepped back inside but can't complain about the Djourou 2nd yellow. It was a little on the soft side but you can't put your arm across someone who's got the position on you like that. We've been ravaged by injuries to our back four and it's inevitable that teams can take advantage of our shortcomings in that area. Hopefully January can see us add to numbers in that area...i'd hate to see us start relying on squillachi because he's absolutely terrible!
Click to expand...
Don't worry, Pat Rice said if Henry plays so will he. Arsenal will change there name to the pensioners.
 
For heavens sake, wenger has to go. Anyone can see we need defenders. Djorou and squillaci are championship level at best. We can easily finish 4th if we splash some cash. A utility def, a central def at the very least. We could also do with a striker or ideally 2. Get rid of arshavin and rosicky too. Barton has impressed me this season, maybe offer him player/manager at arsenal at kill 2 birds at 1 stone?

Barton's red was harsh but he dived v arsenal at start of season so has no right to complain.
 
Wow...........Liverpool admit Suarez was using racial comments.
 
So no Suarez tonight following LFC deciding not to appeal.

Doh - I wanted him playing against City.

Still - another amusing press statement.
 
Last edited:
Apparently, his first game back will be at Old Trafford........who writes the scripts?
 
They're admitting nothing. Unbelievable. Suarez and Liverpool both still denying it.

No apology, no acceptance that the club or he has done anything wrong. Accepting the ban, but not the charge or verdict. Classy as ever and always the victims.
 
Last edited:
dinners said:
They're admitting nothing. Unbelievable. Suarez and Liverpool both still denying it.

No apology, no acceptance that the club or he has done anything wrong. Accepting the ban, but not the charge or verdict. Classy as ever and always the victims.
Click to expand...

Why would they accept something that isn't true?

Correction

Why would they accept something they don't believe is true.
 
Last edited:
Anyway - looking forward to tonight's games.....
 
Well, the FA have to be seen to be doing something to justify their existence... trouble is the pretty much always get it wrong!! Didn't Fergie say he could never manage England? Surely thats racist as his reason for doing so was because of race?
 
cambsno said:
Well, the FA have to be seen to be doing something to justify their existence... trouble is the pretty much always get it wrong!! Didn't Fergie say he could never manage England? Surely thats racist as his reason for doing so was because of race?
Click to expand...

Wrong, that is nationalistic what Fergie said........England is not a race but a country.

Why is it when ever I say a player is one of the best around they cock up......Reina, what were you doing.
 
tiler65 said:
Wrong, that is nationalistic what Fergie said........England is not a race but a country.

Why is it when ever I say a player is one of the best around they cock up......Reina, what were you doing.
Click to expand...

Is ok to be nationalist? Why is that better than being racist?
 
joescrivens said:
Is ok to be nationalist? Why is that better than being racist?
Click to expand...
Probably not Joe but it is not a crime to be nationalistic and don't forget that he is British. (I want to insert a smilie but I have already used it today)
 
Dive Dive Dive........terrible decision for city's penalty
 
Looking like an easy 3 points for us mackems :)
 
tiler65 said:
Dive Dive Dive........terrible decision for city's penalty
Click to expand...

Definately! And since the referee gave a penalty skirtel should have been off. And Barry's second yellow was nothing.

Some shocking refereeing the past two days: the man city pen, djourou's second yellow, Barry's second yellow, barton's red and how on earth was lampard not sent off?
 
PhotoshopEditer said:
Definately! And since the referee gave a penalty skirtel should have been off. And Barry's second yellow was nothing.

Some shocking refereeing the past two days: the man city pen, djourou's second yellow, Barry's second yellow, barton's red and how on earth was lampard not sent off?
Click to expand...

Didn't see the match, was Skirtel last man then?
 
I've just read through the summary of the FA's findings in the Suarez case on the Guardian website and it seems to weigh pretty heavily against him. No wonder Liverpool aren't challenging the decision now there's all the paperwork in front of them.
 
cambsno said:
For heavens sake, wenger has to go.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but your 'Wenger out' claims are so petulant, I would like you to suggest a replacement and/or more detail to complaints of 'we need a decent defender/striker/midfielder.

I don't even support Arsenal but your persistent lack of awareness eludes me. Do you complain when RVP turns up and gets the 3 points?

Thanks
 
fabs said:
He would have to have been through on goal with no other defender there for it to have been a red card.
Click to expand...

Not true. The ref must send off the player in the circumstances you illustrate, but he can always give a yellow or red as he sees fit for any offence.
 
PMK said:
Baring in mind the team and management were supporting Suarez - with T-shirts?! Now they aren't going to challenge the decision?

If they thought he was innocent surely they would back him?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. They would only exercise the right to appeal if they thought they could oveturn the decision, which they have concluded they can't since the FA have an agenda. Instead, accept it, move on and don't waste more pathetic time on it.
 
Went to the pub to watch the game and as a result only saw the first half properly, the two goals looked like really poor play by Liverpool. But the penalty in the second half I did see and that was a dive.

Only consolation is that I got a clean sheet and 2 assists on my ff.
 
Stratman said:
Not true. The ref must send off the player in the circumstances you illustrate, but he can always give a yellow or red as he sees fit for any offence.
Click to expand...

I was replying to a post that said he should have got a red because the ref gave a penalty. I was just pointing out that a red card wasn't automatic in that situation and was giving an example where it would have been.
 
Red cards are for denying goal scoring opportunities NOT for being the last man but like many rules it is too ambiguous.

Re: the FF points from tonight's games....33 of 'em....get in.
 
Last edited:
It isn't both Marc, no such directive as 'last man' and that is the reason why it is ambiguous because it is only the refs opinion that counts, regarding if he/she thinks there will be a goal scoring opportunity.
 
I've always heard it as if the man making the tackle (and subsequent foul)is the last man between the person with the goal scoring opportunity and the goal/goalkeeper then that is when the red card should be automatic. It has been discussed in this way many times on MotD this season, including one where there was a debate of whether another player would have got across in time to challenge.

If it was just a goal scoring opportunity that was required, every game would end up as five-a-side.
 
fabs said:
I've always heard it as if the man making the tackle (and subsequent foul)is the last man between the person with the goal scoring opportunity and the goal/goalkeeper then that is when the red card should be automatic. It has been discussed in this way many times on MotD this season, including one where there was a debate of whether another player would have got across in time to challenge.

If it was just a goal scoring opportunity that was required, every game would end up as five-a-side.
Click to expand...
Just because the pundits on MoTD say 'last man' does not mean it is correct but as you pointed out in your last statement, the law/rule is an ass.
 
tiler65 said:
Just because the pundits on MoTD say 'last man' does not mean it is correct but as you pointed out in your last statement, the law/rule is an ass.
Click to expand...

I just had a quick google and you're right, it is ambiguous. I think it's just become accepted that the red card is generally given if the potential goalscorer is "through on goal", hence "the last man".
 
PMK said:
Sorry, but your 'Wenger out' claims are so petulant, I would like you to suggest a replacement and/or more detail to complaints of 'we need a decent defender/striker/midfielder.

I don't even support Arsenal but your persistent lack of awareness eludes me. Do you complain when RVP turns up and gets the 3 points?

Thanks
Click to expand...

My post was a tongue in cheek reply. I suggested Barton as player manger!

I do think that wenger has had his time, there are a number of players we should have bought if we are to compete with the top clubs. Joey Barton, Scott Parker, jermaine Defoe, Darren bent, Leighton baines, Phil jagielka, jack rodwell, Kevin Nolan, gary Cahill,Steven Taylor, chris samba, gaby agbonlahor, Ryan shawcross, Robert huth are all names that spring to mind of the top of my head who are far better than the likes of rosicky, arsharvin, park, chamack, squillaci, djorou, santos.

I certainly don't see us winning any trophies with wenger, and what annoys me is that he fails to see the serious issues we have in the team and keeps saying how we are a young side, referee was against us and not sorting out the repeated defensive mistakes. If Rvp gets injured who have we got, Henry on loan and Park who has played 2 games. After he African cup we have gervino who works hard but not player who would be in contention at other top 5 clubs and chamack who wenger does not rate and is not playing well.
 
Thought Liverpool's play on the whole was OK - certainly didn't deserve to loose by 3 goals.

The penalty - there was contact but it was pretty minimal. One of those that isn't a shocking decision if it's given or a shocking decision if it's not.
 
fabs said:
I was replying to a post that said he should have got a red because the ref gave a penalty. I was just pointing out that a red card wasn't automatic in that situation and was giving an example where it would have been.
Click to expand...

You didn't understand what I said. It wasn't a red card because it was in the box, it was a red card because it was denying a goal scoring opportunity.

I didn't think it was a foul, but since it was given skirtel should have been sent off.
 
PhotoshopEditer said:
You didn't understand what I said. It wasn't a red card because it was in the box, it was a red card because it was denying a goal scoring opportunity.

I didn't think it was a foul, but since it was given skirtel should have been sent off.
Click to expand...

I did understand what you said. My point was that just being a goal scoring opportunity does not mean an automatic red card, other factors would have to be taken into account. A player with ball at feet 20 yards out with a clear sight of goal is a goal scoring opportunity but a foul wouldn't automatically warrant a red card if there were other players betwwen him and the goal. That's why I asked if there were other players between the Man City player and the goal because I hadn't seen it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top