*Official* English Football Season 2009-2010

[Uppercut]

For all the embarrassing fawning over him on the BBC, Rooney's been pretty poor since coming on. Berbatov's been brilliant.

 

[Loony BoB]

Something tells me Vidic doesn't like playing against fast players. Finally on a yellow, though.

 

[Uppercut]

Boom! Successful reverse-jinx.

 

[Loony BoB]

All happening now! How long since the Carling Cup had all goalscorers be English?

 

[Furball]

Don't think anyone is actually defending Van Persie here tbh

I will, given who he was trying to maim. Should be encouraged IMO.

 

[Furball]

Commentary for Rooney's goal was ****ing nauseating. Hope he's got enough kleenex to clean up all the spunk.

In other news, Rangers beat Celtic to effectively kill off the SPL, suprise suprise, Celtic fans up in arms about the referee, once again ignoring the faults of their own side.

Long may it continue, hopefully they won't realise how dire their side is until they're struggling to challenge for the top 6.

 

[sledger]

I will, given who he was trying to maim. Should be encouraged IMO.

Well, that goes without saying itbt.

 

[Jarquis]

I thought there was some talk about the Van Persie challenge tbf, I know it was discussed elsewhere if not on this forum. His left foot looks bad after he's slidden through but there wasn't a lot of risk of it causing damage. It was the swing with the right which was ugly. Doesn't excuse Adebayor's actions obv.

 

[Furball]

Let's all laugh at Martin O'Neill.

Nae joy ya speccy rat.

 

[Jarquis]

It is strange that seemingly all but one of the people saying it wasn't the worst tackle in the world are United fans.

Don't think anybody was making it out to be the worst tackle in the world bu a bad one nonetheless.

Look at the tackle though- what should Shawcross have done? It's a 50-50 and he tries to play the ball. Should he have pulled out? It's dangerous, obviously, but that's because football's dangerous. Occasionally you will try to play the ball and injure someone. But if Denilson had been in that situation, pulled out and let the other player have the ball, and Stoke had scored a winner, would you not be livid?

I mean, he's trying to kick the ball. There isn't really a safe way to go into a challenge like that, and pulling out brings just as much criticism. What does he do that you wouldn't want an Arsenal player to do?

I think saying that the challenge was a 50/50 is stretching it a little. The ball was running away from Shawcross and Ramsey looked like getting there first the whole time. The fact that Shawcross had to put in the horrible reaching sycthe just confirms that.
There may be no 100% safe way to go into a challenge like that but there sure as hell is a safer way. A less reckless way, if you will.

 

[Jarquis]

He's running pretty damn fast though. The first thing that struck me about the incident was how quickly it happened. It's not really reasonable to expect him to think "****, need to play this ball more softly than usual" in a situation like that.

He just does more or less what I would have done, and what I think the majority of footballers would have done. That's why I'm defending him.

What was he hoping to gain from that situation though? Give Arsenal a goal kick? If Shawcross got there the ball was going out of the stadium.

 

[Jarquis]

Well, Ramsey could have conceivably broken Shawcross's leg with his challenge too. Would you call his challenge reckless?

Could you clarify whether this was a "innocuous tackles can break legs so based on that principle tackling should be outlawed" joke or a serious comment?

Edit : Found your explanation.

Of course he could have, you can break someone's leg in any tackle. His foot was off the ground, as it has to be when trying to kick a football, and all it took was for Shawcross's leg to be in the wrong place and it would be broken. No? Isn't there a risk to any tackle ever?

Well at the point of impact Ramsey's foot was planted, he'd already played the ball. In order for his leg to be in the air it would've had to mean he was the second to the ball and Shawcross had already kicked the ball away. You can't be certain what would happen in that scenario though because if Ramsey felt Shawcross was favourite to get to the ball you can't be sure of what might have happened.

 

[Jarquis]

Watch the 'tube video, watch Ramsey, see him jump. *shrug* If you don't actually watch "both" players and instead watch what they were doing individually, you see Shawcross following the ball and going to kick it, which is fair enough as he just pushed it forward. Then watch Ramsey, you see him head towards the ball and then, at the last second, jump into the challenge. He wasn't swinging because he didn't have a planted foot - he was jumping into it. Or am I completely blind?

Disagree, he wasn't jumping into the tackle at all. He jumped in his approach to the ball and then once he'd landed poked his foot forward to touch the ball, planted his foot after playing the ball and then Shawcross booted him 8 inches up the shin.

 

[Loony BoB]

What was he hoping to gain from that situation though? Give Arsenal a goal kick? If Shawcross got there the ball was going out of the stadium.

Nah, it wasn't, after looking at it. I originally thought it was a clearance too, but to me it looks like he's just pushing the ball forward. He's running, hence the swing. Check the video I linked for a decent quality version, ignore Ramsey for a second, watch his run, you wouldn't expect that to be a hoofed ball coming up. Certainly not in the opposition half. Ramsey didn't look like getting there first until he put in the big jump forward, connecting with the ball as he was coming down from the jump.

EDIT: After seeing your newest post, guess we'll have to disagree.

EDIT2: Never heard Vidic speak but totally didn't think he'd sound like that. He almost sounds camp.

 

[Matteh]

Christ, shut up.

It wasn't a bad tackle, but it ended up being mis-timed. It can't be described as high or reckless at all and it definitely wasn't an intentional desire to hurt the player as the reaction of Shawcross showed. All this talk of 'stopping this thing' from happening is rubbish, means we'll end up with a crap game like basketball/netball/gaelic football where tackling is forbidden because someone might get hurt, eventually the ball will be made out of foam because goalkeepers are sick of getting their nose broken.

Stop being all nanny state, take your red tinted glasses off and get over it. It's an accident in which someone has unfortunately ended up with their leg in a mess.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Had no idea Vidic was a homosexual until now; waaaay camp voice.

 

[Jarquis]

It wasn't a bad tackle. It can't be described as high or reckless at all.

Serious?

 

[marc71178]

IIRC, Alan Smith's injury was similar and I saw it then as I see this one.

Similar if you replace horror tackle with ball, yes.

 

[roseboy64]

The reaction to your reaction has been nothing like as vociferous (with the exception of Rose, who was winding everyone up).

Actually tbf I was probably unfair in bracketing all Arsenal fans together, because I didn't see the likes of Brumby or Sledger reacting far OTT.

Wasn't an attempt to wind up TBF. Just the usual "Arsenal persecution complex" got to me.

 

[roseboy64]

Christ, shut up.

It wasn't a bad tackle, but it ended up being mis-timed. It can't be described as high or reckless at all and it definitely wasn't an intentional desire to hurt the player as the reaction of Shawcross showed. All this talk of 'stopping this thing' from happening is rubbish, means we'll end up with a crap game like basketball/netball/gaelic football where tackling is forbidden because someone might get hurt, eventually the ball will be made out of foam because goalkeepers are sick of getting their nose broken.

Stop being all nanny state, take your red tinted glasses off and get over it. It's an accident in which someone has unfortunately ended up with their leg in a mess.

This man speaks wise.