Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Having seen the goal this morning I thought that the ref made a rod for his own back by first stopping Sunderland from taking a quick free kick, presumably because either the ball was moving or it was taken from the wrong place. When Turner then took the kick the ref wasn't even watching so he appeared to be chancing his arm. Having said that I could see nothing wrong with it. I did think Gerrard should have been sent off later though.

expat Wrote:

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

> but there was no players bar the keeper from the

> sunderland side between him and the goal.


You cannot be offside if you are behind the ball when it is played


In regard the free kick, Turner played the ball from the spot the free kick was given. Turner and the Keeper were in noddy land whilst Torres latched onto what he thought was a dopey back pass.


As for Steve Bruce. What a &*^%! When Carragher and Skrtel clashed heads Bruce was yelling at the officials for allowing Skrtel to be treated on pitch as he wanted game to be re-started with 11 against 9.

???? Wrote:

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

> Someone make a case for the Premiership not being

> Chelsea's Please :X. Can't see them being beaten

> enough times (if at all).



Despite the fact that they lost, and deservedly so, to Man City on Saturady I can't see beyond them for the title.


Arsenal were woeful on Saturady, well done to WBA. The Arsenal defending was non existent and Almunia was worse.


What to say about Fergusons charges? Hmmm, conceding two goals in each of their past four games doesn't have the look of champions about it. If Arsenal can't beat the likes of WBA at home and Ferguson can't get the better of Bolton, they've got no chance.


Also well done to both City and the Hammers

If only Woskincy or whatever his name is had kept his trap shut he might be given a chance ? he is currently 4th cgoice but with the 3 in front doing so badly, Wenger might have given him a shout soon (which is partly his complaint I know)


But young un?s who pipe up in the media aren?t looked on kindly by Wenger. Whether he has that luxury or not is open to debate

Fabianski in goal for The Arsenal tonight, and Mr. Wenger claims he has total belief in his abilities. Hmmmm. In the same way that I think Spurs have a genuine chance of winning the title after a 50 year wait and that Mr. Redknapp really is as good as he thinks he is.


Mr. Wenger you are genuinely deluded, get rid and get a decent keeper, two decent defenders, a decent tough tackling Midfielder a la Viera, and a decent striker. Other than that, no worries!!!

Jah Lush Wrote:

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

> It's been as plain as day for a very long time

> that the Arse have needed a top quality goalkeeper

> apart that is from Mr Magoo.






You did not post all weekend Jah - were you away ?






to westham?

Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> Jah Lush Wrote:

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

> -----

>> You did not post all weekend Jah - were you away ?

>

>

>

>

>

>

> to westham?



Was that really necessary?;-)

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

    • Definitely not a charity, but a for-profit community interest company (CIC).  https://www.londoncentric.media/p/we-r-blighty-fundraising-regulator-criticism-broke-rules
    • Yes I saw that. I'm not intending to give them money! I just wonder why, if they are actually collecting money under false pretences (rather than not having gone through the proper channels) they have not been prosecuted?
    • From the Fundraising regulator link: "we concluded that it was more likely than not that donors could have been misled by confusing messaging or fundraising materials. This includes materials suggesting a link with a well-known national veterans’ charity, which the CIC has since confirmed it does not work with. We were also concerned about the costings in some of the fundraising materials that the CIC could not show good enough evidence for. There was also enough information available for us to conclude on balance that some fundraisers for the CIC acted in an aggressive and unprofessional way towards both potential donors and public officials."   Some of the money may make it to the people they say but there are better ways to support veterans 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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