Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We've conceded far too many goals this season. It doesn't help when you don't have a consistent pairing at the back. At one time or another we've had three or four centre-halves out. Dawson and Woodgate long term and Ledley King with his persistent knee problems. Eleven different pairings in 13 games. It doesn't help. Monsieur Wenger was correct not to give William Gallas another contract at Arsenal. I think Harry could have looked elsewhere. He's definitely not the player he was five or even six years ago.

I read this on another forum and it captured exactly what I thought when it happened


"And Szczesny played brilliantly. That epic-punch at the end was like a big 'FUCK YEA' aimed at Almunia and Fabianski. "


Although with Fabianski playing well in the last 4 or 5 games we might be seeing an end to Arsenal's goalkeeping problem


Bendtner was out of order for that second goal and should have been penalised.


That said, and I'm not condoning it, it shows that Arsenal are getting a bit grittier and aren't quite the pushovers they were a year or two back


And you can argue the goal changed the complexion of the game but overall the Arsenal win was right surely?

To be honest I thought it was a so so game, but we should have been ahead after 20 seconds had Vela put his scoring boots on, and Bendtner should have scored after 48 seconds but there you go. Barton reverted to type by clattering into Cesc and shame for Gibbs who went off injured yet again.

Just seen these words on the front page of the Express "Collen finally forgives ?230,000 a week Wayne, "things are great" she says".

Reminded me of the Mrs Merton sketch when she said to Debbie McGee " So Debbie McGee, what was it that first attracted you to millionaire magician Paul Daniels?" Wonderful

Emerson Crane Wrote:

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

> Just seen these words on the front page of the

> Express "Collen finally forgives ?230,000 a week

> Wayne, "things are great" she says".

> Reminded me of the Mrs Merton sketch when she said

> to Debbie McGee " So Debbie McGee, what was it

> that first attracted you to millionaire magician

> Paul Daniels?" Wonderful


My recollection is more like:

"So Debbie, What was it that first attracted you to the short, bald ......multi millionaire, Paul Daniels?"

Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> Another big penalty call goes rangers way. You

> will not see a softer one than that. Shame because

> the referee was doing well - but you need to get

> the big calls right above all else.





FORMER FIFA Grade One referee Kenny Clark believes the wrong man has been fingered for the penalty error that gifted Rangers a spot-kick in last week's 3-1 Old Firm win over Celtic.

The furore over referees' performances in the SPL has been kept on the boil after a seemingly unsighted Willie Collum adjudged Rangers' Kirk Broadfoot to have been felled by Celtic's Daniel Majstorovic. But Clark believes that should not "be the star


"The root of the problem here was Kirk Broadfoot taking a dive," the retired official said. "How many people have asked difficult questions of Kirk Broadfoot for taking a dive?


Enough said....Referee condemns rangers dive.::o

Talking of referees, Mark Clattenburgh's comedy of errors at Old Trafford yesterday takes some beating. No wait. Pedro Mendez's last minute winning 'goal' that was a yard over the line at where? Old Trafford. Referee = Mark Clattenburg. Do those sort of decisions happen anywhere else and is he a Man Utd supporter?
Looks to me from the video I saw that he's waving play on. Also, there was no flag from the linesman and it should have been a penalty anyway. It's frustrating I know, but most comments I've heard over the last 24 hours have reiterated the rule we are taught from the year dot. Play to the whistle.

SCSB79 Wrote:

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

the linesman

> who (rightly) told the ref to over turn a penalty

> decision for Celtic resigns because of threats

> following the game...

> TGFITW my arse.



Sorry SCSB - you need to accept when you are wrong - it was not the linesman changing the decision - No we know the truth on this one and its just another cover up of an incorrect decision against Celtic - then proof of lying to Celtic's management etc.


Hats off to the linesman who has been big enough to be open and honest - something a little bit short in the scottish game at the moment.



Steven Craven has revealed that he agreed to lie to Celtic manager Neil Lennon about a penalty incident at Tannadice two weeks ago. Craven resigned following the controversial decision and though the SFA cleared match referee Dougie McDonald of any wrongdoing they did warn him about inconsistencies in his match report.


McDonald had awarded Celtic a penalty during the game on October 17 but, following a discussion with assistant Craven, reversed his decision. Celtic manager Lennon was furious with the decision and Craven has told a newspaper that he and McDonald lied in the aftermath.


?Dougie ran towards me and said: 'I think I've f***** up.',? Craven told the Sunday Mail. ?After the game Dougie said we should tell the referee supervisor (Jim McBurnie) that I called him over to question the penalty award.


"I went along with it because I wanted to be supportive of Dougie. But then Neil Lennon came in after the game and asked Dougie why he hadn't given the penalty kick.

Narnia Wrote:

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

> Ah come on, blame the ref because Gomez was a

> plonker.



And Nani's impression of a fish thats just been landed on a river bank, or a kid who has been told by his mum he can't have any sweets was hilarious. What the f**k was Ferdinand doing talking to the ref and linesman, why didn't the ref just tell him to sod off? Old trafforditis? Would the ref acted in the same way if it had been at the other end. What do you think? If it wasn't a penalty then it should have been handball to spurs, but this was Old Trafford.

> Sorry SCSB - you need to accept when you are wrong

> - it was not the linesman changing the decision -

> No we know the truth on this one and its just

> another cover up of an incorrect decision against

> Celtic - then proof of lying to Celtic's

> management etc.

>

> Hats off to the linesman who has been big enough

> to be open and honest - something a little bit

> short in the scottish game at the moment.

>


Ok - hands up that the main reason was wrong, but he did get threats.


And the only cover up was the explanation to TLB and Celtic.


IT WAS NOT AN INCORRECT DECISION... but hey, Celtic & Facts = Oil & water. The decision was 100% bang on. The way it's been explained as the ref/lino/SFA have now said, is where the problem lies.

>

> And Nani's impression of a fish thats just been

> landed on a river bank, or a kid who has been told

> by his mum he can't have any sweets was hilarious.

> What the f**k was Ferdinand doing talking to the

> ref and linesman, why didn't the ref just tell him

> to sod off? Old trafforditis? Would the ref acted

> in the same way if it had been at the other end.

> What do you think? If it wasn't a penalty then it

> should have been handball to spurs, but this was

> Old Trafford.



It was funny though!

SCSB79 Wrote:

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

>

The way it's been explained as the

> ref/lino/SFA have now said, is where the problem

> lies.


It was a referee and linesman agreeing to lie to a Manager about their decision. That is what it was.


Together with the former referee Kenny Clark stating openly that Kirk Broadfoot dived in the Old Firm match, and that the referee should not be blamed for the wrong decision, you wonder what we are supposed to expect of referees.


I'm not one to usually join in referee bashing to be honest and I can usually understand honest mistakes and how difficult ther job is, but its getting beyond a joke, both north and south of the border.


Penalty decisions generally and Clattenburg type decisions are key to results of games in that they result in goals to teams that don't deserve them based upon what has happended immediately beforehand. These decisions get people frustrated.

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

    • Hey Sue, I was wrong - I don't think it would just be for foreign tourists. So yeah I assume that, if someone lives in Lewisham and wants to say the night in southwark, they'd pay a levy.  The hotels wouldn't need to vet anyone's address or passports - the levy is automatically added on top of the bill by every hotel / BnB / hostel and passed on to Southwark. So basically, you're paying an extra two quid a night, or whatever, to stay in this borough.  It's a great way to drive footfall... to the other London boroughs.  https://www.ukpropertyaccountants.co.uk/uk-tourist-tax-exploring-the-rise-of-visitor-levies-and-foreign-property-charges/
    • Pretty much, Sue, yeah. It's the perennial, knotty problem of imposing a tax and balancing that with the cost of collecting it.  The famous one was the dog licence - I think it was 37 1/2 pence when it was abolished, but the revenue didn't' come close to covering the administration costs. As much I'd love to have a Stasi patrolling the South Bank, looking for mullet haircuts, unshaven armpits, overly expressive hand movements and red Kicker shoes, I'm afraid your modern Continental is almost indistinguishable from your modern Londoner. That's Schengen for you. So you couldn't justify it from an ROI point of view, really. This scheme seems a pretty good idea, overall. It's not perfect, but it's cheap to implement and takes some tax burden off Southwark residents.   'The Man' has got wise to this. It's got bad juju now. If you're looking to rinse medium to large amounts of small denomination notes, there are far better ways. Please drop me a direct message if you'd like to discuss this matter further.   Kind Regards  Dave
    • "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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