Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Kells Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I give up with them! Glad I stayed in and

> listened to it on the radio now, saves being

> laughed out of a pub! It's absurd though, had we

> won we could have been 11th. So I'm telling

> myself not to give up just yet............

>

> PS Poor Pompey, being nagged for a loyalty bonus

> as well. Have to admire Defoe's cheek though!



Spurs were stupid enough to pay him it.


Not looking forward to next Sunday. I can see myself getting arrested again! ;)

Murphy - you mean McAllister.


Oddly 5 of the 6 pundits from the 2 big games this weekend on Setanta and Sky all played under Houllier at Liverpool.


There is so much football on TV that they've even found work for likes of Don Hutchison and Dominic Matteo.


How dumb is Wayne Rooney for not signalling to the linesman what he was doing at the fake corner kick. Up until then it was a great game that was pretty even but then once United got their noses in front United played like a steam train.


I know the third goal was just the icing on the cake for United but it was a clear foul and I'd imagine Chelsea fans want to hear it being called as a foul back in the studio - not Jamie Redknapp saying it was like a block in Basketball as they slow-mo Vidic congratulating himself for the illegal block.

You knew who I meant Matthew. :-$


The corner seemed to work. Even if the first one didn't it broke their concentration for the next corner. It reminded me of the free kick that Giggs and Scholes worked a few seasons back, both making a run up to take the kick, stopping as if to let the other take it and they'd made a mistake and beginning to walk away and then Giggs whipping round and sending the ball into the box. Personally I thought it was pretty clever and there didn't seem to be much wrong with it.


I've just seen the 'foul' you are talking about again on the news and I can't see it, if the Chelsea defenders wanted to get around Vidic it wouldn't have been difficult they just didn't look very committed . Great to have Evra back. He makes such a difference for us with his pace, crossing and those overlapping runs.

Mascherano was sent off after receiving two yellow cards at OT last season. The first was for a foul, which was not disimilar to Anderson's a few miutes beforehand (for which no action was taken). The second was for questioning the ref "what's happening?" after Torres asked for protection from the ref.


He shouldn't have done it and therefore should have been sent off, no arguments from me there. However when you see Rooney effing amd blinding at a clearly petrified linesman, you do wonder where Man United sit in terms of their agreements with the FA.


Still think Rafa was ranting?

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What are your thoughts on the way that Rooney

> spoke to the linesman after "that" corner?


I thought it was hillarious. The linesman - who had made a complete fook up, looked like he was about to cry!


Cannot blame Rooney for screaming at him imo. Perfectly good and well executed goal disallowed for nothing against Chelsea. I'd scream too!

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> He shouldn't have done it and therefore should

> have been sent off, no arguments from me there.

> However when you see Rooney effing amd blinding at

> a clearly petrified linesman, you do wonder where

> Man United sit in terms of their agreements with

> the FA.

>

> Still think Rafa was ranting?


I think there's two of you ranting now.


It seems the pressure might be getting to a few people. ;-)


As Ratty says, perfectly good corner disallowed against Chelsea, I'd have been annoyed and let's face it he rants and raves at everyone. Do I like it? No. But there's not a lot I can do about it and I love everything else about him (except where he comes from :-)) and I love his passion.

Technically it was a perfectly good corner, even if it was gamesmanship, but Rooney should maybe have indicated to linesman his plan as it was unusual and hence did not register with linesman.


Frank Lampard took a kick at the ankle from the already booked Ronaldo in the second half, fair play to Lampard he just grimaced and waved away Ref... wonder what the reaction would have been if it's been the already booked Lampard on Ronaldo or is that a silly question?

I watched the highlights last night and saw an almost identical kick from Lampard on Ronaldo in the first half.


I'd also be interested to hear what you thought of Balletti's challenge on Ronaldo towards the end of the game? Lashed out once, didn't stop him, so scythed him down two footed, from behind.

Belletti should have been given a straight red card - it was a cowardly challenge. I'll not be making any comments over the conduct of Wayne Rooney.


I don't have a problem with Spurs, but oh dear it is not working out with Harry Redknapp is it... Spurs fans welcomed Harry with open arms when he took over from Ramos but I think it's fair to say if he'd taken over in the summer there'd have been running riots outside the Lane... are Spurs going down?

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Annasfield Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > What are your thoughts on the way that Rooney

> > spoke to the linesman after "that" corner?

>

> I thought it was hillarious. The linesman - who

> had made a complete fook up, looked like he was

> about to cry!

>

> Cannot blame Rooney for screaming at him imo.

> Perfectly good and well executed goal disallowed

> for nothing against Chelsea. I'd scream too!


Sorry, but no. This is the problem. Petulent little sh*ts (not just Man Utd by any stretch) who, when a decision doesn't go their way, go off the deep-end. I shudder to think what a lip-reader would have made of it!


Compare this to rugby, and how decisions and discipline are dealt with and the difference is clear. I'm aware of the "pressures" of the modern game (somewhat alleviated by ?80k a week salaries I should think) but this sort of behaviour is one of the biggest turn-offs of the modern game.

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jamie Carragher "Should have listened to Rafa and

> gone zonal" >:D

> How Rooney didn't get a booking there I will never

> know. Come on Chelsea.



Carra is brill. If that was a Liverpool defensive error Monkeyhands would have banged on about zonal marking for a good ten minutes.


Rooney above the "respect" campaign. What a surprise. A 30 yard dash in full fury and a blatant curse at the linesman..nothing done. "Fact"


In all what a depressing weekend. The worst performance by Liverpool of the season. We miss an on form Alonso. Rafa still frustrates me at times the stubborn legend. At no point during the game did we look threatening, yet he still plays with the two defensive midfielders. In a long time we havent changed a system mid game to try to create something different. Previously when we did we won the game (albeit often against 10 men). I would take 2 wins and 3 losses over 5 draws.

So many players ineffectual against the lumps that are Stoke. Still, we will see. Derby is now massive.


Wigan could do us a favour, but Bruce will no doubt rollover for them again. I wonder has any ex Utd player ever beaten Utd whilst managing??

I don't think any Prem manager is going to roll over for anyone (unless it's the end of the season and there is nothing to play for. Ha ha ha ha ha Shef U). Surely one of Fergie's ex players would love to get one over on their old gaffer wouldn't they?


Once I was the student, now I am master! >:D<


Whilst I can see Matthew's point about making the refs look a bit harder at United, I think this whole thing has actually made Rafa look a bit silly. He got no support in the press (except for maybe a couple of through and through reds), he then goes and loses. After the match he should have refused to talk about it, and just talked about the match, but instead talks about "Mr Ferguson" again (is that also a dig saying Mr instead of Sir?). Fergie's team then trash Chelsea, and he gets to take the "moral high ground" by saying just a couple of lines (which he knew would get headlines - DISTURBED!), before saying he'd rather just talk about the match.


Rafa 0 - 1 Fergie


That's my view of it anyway.


Stop farting around, forget everyone else, and just concentrate on the games in front of you. Everyone knows Fergi likes a mind game, so just don't listen to him, or just send him a private death threat! ;-)

Sandperson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ha, ha. More Liverpool conspiracy theories. It's

> looking more and more like Benitez isn't the only

> one who can't take the pressure.



Just asking a question. In fact I can't recall any of Bruce's sides ever even getting a point. Just asking about facts.


Regarding Rafa's "rant". His little smile half way through showed he was totally doing it for sport. Hardly a Keegan losing it.

And for Meester Ferguson, he hardly has "won" mind games in the past anyway. Wenger got under his nose and made him lose it one year, and Mourinho outdid him on many occasion. To rattle Keegan was hardly difficult....he could often do that of his own accord...see what happened when he was England manager.

So this talk of him being some sort of mind gaming genius is way off the mark. If anything, his continuing petulance in not giving interviews to those who have ever written anything negative towards him, shows he is still the belligerent old classless thunderous nob he has always been. He may be a great manager, but he has always shown to be quick to lose control of his temper etc. Just ask Beckham, Stam, reporters etc.


I'd rather have Rafa any day of the week, even if we don't win as much. I would quite easily be able to have a drink with Rafa and a nice conversation. Same even with Mourinho and Wenger. There is a warmth to all of them, it looks like they can "play the game". I can tell that Whiskeynose would get on my nerves in 10 mins flat.

Rafa wants to put pressure on Referees taking charge of United - mission accomplished.


The bit about Rafa being disturbed, cracking under pressure, losing the plot is a sideshow and it's the trivial reaction to be expected from commentators and journalists who are more partizan than credible.


If United play football that merits victory then great they'll deserve the honours but Rafa just wants to make sure it's no longer aided by Referees who make cowardly decisions - even if it is at the cost of his personal reputation.


Rafa YNWA.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...