i F**king hate that Horseface

Thanx 4 The Fish · 22-09-2003 04:30PM

Interesting then that the guys on the news channel had a different view on it, perhaps it was the angle that was shown from, anyway, it is certainly something that will have to be worked out a bit better than a guy who is 25 yards away watching the spot where the ball is struck and simultaneously the place that the keeper is standing in relation to the line.

yop · 22-09-2003 04:54PM

But it is the responsibility of the linesman to watch the keeper, and the ref to watch the players on the edge on the box, so if the linesman was "doing his job" then it would have been a re-take.

BKtje · 22-09-2003 04:56PM

According to the present climate with refs and peno's i think it should have been retaken.

*** Ruud was 'assaulted' after the game and i still hope the FA take action. Maybe not deduct points (tho that would quickly sort them out) but a large fine on Arsenal would also do. They dont have the cash to pay large fines week in week out so they'd quikcly sort it out.

[why is -i m o- now censored? ]

yop · 22-09-2003 05:03PM

I think they will either throw the book at them or let them off, they are a strange bunch in the FA.

I think though the fact that they want all video from all camera views then this means they want to sort it out. Possibly with the Turkey match coming up they do not want "violence" on the pitch to pour onto the pitch.

Was talkin to a lad there today and was saying that there was a father and son walking down from match, both wearing arse jerseys. Son was on dads shoulders and as they were walking past a pub someone flaked a glass at them.

I just cannot understand this behaviour. Why week in week out we can go to GAA matches and League of Ireland matches and for everyone to mingle, even kids now at matches don't seem to be safe. Pathetic

Thanx 4 The Fish · 22-09-2003 05:03PM

Apparently "imo" is censored because of one of the mods aversions to that well overused TLA.

That's as maybe but the point I am making is that ity is hard for anybody to tell whether or not in the split second before the ball was struck, the goalkeeper moved from the lien, hell it is even tough looking at the tv coverage unless ya see it from the correct angle.

jesus_thats_gre · 22-09-2003 05:05PM

Originally posted by B-K-DzR
According to the present climate with refs and peno's i think it should have been retaken.

*** Ruud was 'assaulted' after the game and i still hope the FA take action. Maybe not deduct points (tho that would quickly sort them out) but a large fine on Arsenal would also do. They dont have the cash to pay large fines week in week out so they'd quikcly sort it out.

[why is -i m o- now censored? ]

I wish we would drop this whole assaulted bit.. If it was you who done the same thing and someone tried to pull you up on an assault charge, what would ya honestly think... This is a piss take....

What happened shouldnt have happened and everyone accepts that. To say he was assaulted is a gross exaduration, ironic considering Ruud is the king of exadurating claims...

Everyone hates the best though..

gandalf · 22-09-2003 07:08PM

Originally posted by B-K-DzR
*** Ruud was 'assaulted' after the game and i still hope the FA take action. Maybe not deduct points (tho that would quickly sort them out) but a large fine on Arsenal would also do. They dont have the cash to pay large fines week in week out so they'd quikcly sort it out.

[why is -i m o- now censored? ]

LOL Van Divesalot wasn't Assaulted he was pushed around a bit. It was out of order and the players will get punished via fines and bans but I expect some United players to also be included in this like Fortune who charged into Lehmann and one of the Chuckles brothers had a swing at Parlour. I would also like to see Van Divesalot getting his come uppance as he did kick out when he jumped on Paddys back and hopefully the FA will take action against him as well.

If there were a few punches thrown then I would use terms like "assaulted" and "attacked". As I said in another post it was handbags at 10 paces stuff.

Gandalf.

Dr Bolouswki · 22-09-2003 09:19PM

Hot on the heels of Channel 4's The 1900s House, where a family lived as the Victorians did with no concessions to modernity, comes The 1900s Press Box, where sports hacks opine as the Victorians did with no concessions to common sense. "Disgraceful!" "Shameful!" "Appalling!" "Scandalous!" "Sick!" they over-reacted after the frankly minor but entertaining spat at Old Trafford, before pulling on their stovepipe hats, mounting their penny farthings, and heading home with a view to engaging in a bit of frottage against that uncovered occasional table.

Let's recap. An Arsenal player nearly kicked a Manchester United player. The Manchester United player over-reacted slightly. The Arsenal player was sent off. Two other Arsenal players pushed the Manchester United player around a bit. And, eh, that's it. All good clean knockabout fun, and the sort of thing we all secretly love, come on, let's face it. But Arsenal must be punished for their wild animalistic ways, so up to five of their players now face being charged by the Sanctimony Association as part of a major disciplinary crackdown.

I think this says it all - as a totally biased observer (I'm Man City) I thought it was hilarious and made a boring match kinda interesting...

It was handbags... this talk of points deducted etc. is pure nonsense...

cournioni · 22-09-2003 09:27PM

An elbow to the neck does count as an assault.

jesus_thats_gre · 22-09-2003 09:34PM

Originally posted by PORNAPSTER
An elbow to the neck does count as an assault.

Oh get over yourself.

cournioni · 22-09-2003 09:38PM

Originally posted by jesus_thats_gre
Oh get over yourself.

:rolleyes:

Thanx 4 The Fish · 22-09-2003 09:44PM

Originally posted by PORNAPSTER
An elbow to the neck does count as an assault.

I would imagine that a knee in the back would aswell if it ever came down to it.

cournioni · 22-09-2003 09:53PM

Originally posted by Thanx 4 The Fish
I would imagine that a knee in the back would aswell if it ever came down to it.

During play, and there was no intent there. He was going for the ball. Alright he took a bit of a kick at Vieira (which isn't clear whether it was intended or not) and both of them got the same card. Vieira was booked before that, RVN wasn't. That is basically it.

Keown's came after the match at it was intended. That is the difference.

GuanYin · 22-09-2003 09:58PM

I don't think he was going for the ball in that challenge.

cournioni · 22-09-2003 10:07PM

Originally posted by sykeirl
I don't think he was going for the ball in that challenge.

Thats fair enough, but I thought he was going for the ball and his challenge was misjudged. It's up to the referee to make the decisions and I think he made the right one by giving both players yellow cards.

p.pete · 22-09-2003 10:11PM

Originally posted by PORNAPSTER
Thats fair enough, but I thought he was going for the ball and his challenge was misjudged. It's up to the referee to make the decisions and I think he made the right one by giving both players yellow cards.

So if somebody at the FA doesn't think the same way as you and decides that the was intent then maybe it will be looked on as assault.

As for Keown he was jumping in celebration with his arms in the air and lost his balance falling towards rvn. No intent whatsoever.

cournioni · 22-09-2003 10:18PM

Originally posted by p.pete
As for Keown he was jumping in celebration with his arms in the air and lost his balance falling towards rvn. No intent whatsoever.

Yeah... right. Just like he was pushing RVN after he missed his penalty.

GuanYin · 22-09-2003 10:23PM

I think you missed p.pete's sarcasm, but don't be put out by it, there was no intent

Seriously though, he may have gone into the challenge for the ball, but he knew damn well that a) he wasn't going to get near the ball and b) he was gonna get Viera.

Now, hey, I'm not saying he should have gotten anything more than a yellow for it, but lets call a spade a spade. I think it was intentional

gandalf · 22-09-2003 11:53PM

btw as far as I was aware Van Divesalot got his yellow for squaring up to Lehmann after the sending off.

Gandalf.

Benbaz · 23-09-2003 09:32AM

Did nobody notice Lehmann pushing the lines man after Viera got his first yellow???? No??

Sposs · 23-09-2003 09:47AM

When will Arsenal learn that the whole world is not against them -In Wenger's rein they have received 52 Red cards.

That tell us more about the lack of control Wenger has on his team other than "the refs are all against us" :rolleyes:

The Muppet · 23-09-2003 09:49AM

Pornapster I wouldn't bother to argue the case with the guys here. It is qiute obvious that they don't want to accept the Truth. We all know that RVN was assaulted ,we all know that Arsenal Stepped ove th mark of acceptable Behaviour and we all know The Man U players acted in a veryrestrained and Professional Manner. The Reason it has not been accepted by the ABU element here is because this time Man U are Victims, If they had been perpetrators on Sunday the ones arguing with you would be screaming of Assaults and cheating.

The FA are looking into the actions of 5 Asenal Players ,The informed comment from soccer pundits including ex Arsenal Players is that Arsenal actions are INDEFENSIBLE so why bother argue with thos who try to defend it just to rise you.

p.pete · 23-09-2003 09:50AM

Originally posted by Benbaz
Did nobody notice Lehmann pushing the lines man after Viera got his first yellow???? No??

If people are going to complain about linesmen getting pushed in defense of ManU then I'm going to start talking about pots and kettles....

cournioni · 23-09-2003 09:51AM

Very true, Muppet.

p.pete, United never pushed any officials. They may have got in their face because of a bad decision. But they never pushed any officials. It is quite obvious that you are an ABU also.

Thanx 4 The Fish · 23-09-2003 09:56AM

Two United players are being investigated too, so come down off that high horse for a minute there boys.

jesus_thats_gre · 23-09-2003 10:49AM

Originally posted by PORNAPSTER
Very true, Muppet.

p.pete, United never pushed any officials. They may have got in their face because of a bad decision. But they never pushed any officials. It is quite obvious that you are an ABU also.

Jaysus PORNAPSTER you are blind. If you want people to respect what you are saying, give a BALANCED opionion.

ZENER · 23-09-2003 10:53AM

This thread should have been called Arsenal & ABU's V's Man U.

I have scoured the FA's website and nowhere does it say any players are under review ! It simply says they are reviewing video and the refs report. Or is this a Sky News exclusive ???

It's obvious that most of the posters here are not supporters of either club involved and that most are just using this forum to get the boot in.

The beauty of live t.v. is that every one can see for them selves what happens in real time and while some united players are guilty of commiting fouls (for which they were issued with cards) the display of the Arsenal team after Paddy's sending off and their reaction after the penalty was taken was disgraceful. Wenger's comments also did not help matters and the comments of people here about the gooners being victimised and trying to pass the blame is pathetic to say the least.

I am a footbal supporter first and foremost and a Man U. supporter secondly. I watch all matches including football league and conference league games.

I agree with the sentiments put forward by the muppet (by name but not by nature) and glad to see some objectiveness coming into this thread.

Tinky

cournioni · 23-09-2003 11:09AM

Originally posted by jesus_thats_gre
Jaysus PORNAPSTER you are blind. If you want people to respect what you are saying, give a BALANCED opionion.

Right you tell me what United done wrong. Ruud had a bad challenge on Vieira. He certainly didn't stamp on him as Vieira claims. I really cannot remember much else that United done wrong apart from Keane's mistimed challenge on Lauren in the first half. Why exactly am I blind, did I miss something?

p.pete · 23-09-2003 11:24AM

Originally posted by PORNAPSTER
Right you tell me what United done wrong. Ruud had a bad challenge on Vieira. He certainly didn't stamp on him as Vieira claims. I really cannot remember much else that United done wrong apart from Keane's mistimed challenge on Lauren in the first half. Why exactly am I blind, did I miss something?

Oh!, I see, your taking the "short of memory" approach. United actually didn't do all that much wrong at the weekend, twas all Arsenals fault. However in the past United have been is situations where people have been pushed and similar things happened.

GuanYin · 23-09-2003 11:27AM

I'll start off by saying Arsenal players found guilty of disrepute should havethe book thrown a them.

However:

1. Ruud made a dangerous challenge playing the man and "allegedly" stood/tried to stand on Viera.

2. Ruud deliberately drew attention to the incident to get Viera into trouble (his reaction was far too exaggerated given the actual incident).

3. Fortune knocked Lehmann over in a "rush" to get the ball for the penalty in the 93rd minute. What was the rush for? Why was it so urgent to get the ball? Why did he have to knock Lehman over to get it?

4. Gary Neville clearly swung a punch at Ray Parlour.

None of these incidents can be justified and all were unprovoked.
Ruud got his yellow for the incident with Lehman and probably deserved a yellow for the challenge, but I would not advocate any measures againts him. However, his behaviour, especially in respect to the second incident I mentioned is not something that any footballer should wish to see in the game. Its quite simply disgustingto see a player try and get another player sent off or booked.

Fortune and Neville are every bit as guilty as the Arsenal players. Fortune had no reason to tussle with Lehman and there is no excuse for swinging a punch at someone.

i F**king hate that Horseface

Comments