Jump to content

Official Arsenal Thread


joshylong
 Share

Recommended Posts

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

I have no idea how you come to this conclusion.

He regularly drives forward' date=' takes people on in tight circumstances and his passing is incisive and dangerous.

Lost his head second half, as did most of your players but ability wise he is undoubtedly one of your better players. Now that he is fit, he needs to stay fit and continue to get game time and match sharpness and I have no doubts he will have a top season.

Cracking player[/quote']

Infernito is right, in his current position Wilshere is mostly dangerous to his own team. English love him so much they are blind to his lacks. His pressing is insufficient often giving opponent too much time to make the pass, his tackling is mediocre, he let's the defence down after losing the ball (against Aston Villa there were good examples).

Wilshere is a very skilled player, very good in dribbling and bringing the ball up, and is an outstanding passer, but he has many lacks in his game and should play higher. However, even as an AM, he is far from perfect. For one thing, he doesn't score goals. Apparently he just hasn't got a shot in him. Doesn't really have to score goals, he has other skills, but obviously that is one thing that he lacks, and also a one thing that many midfielders do provide (e.g. Cazorla, Michu, or, for that matter, Cabaye).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

Apparently he just hasn't got a shot in him. Doesn't really have to score goals' date=' he has other skills, but obviously that is one thing that he lacks, and also a one thing that many midfielders do provide (e.g. Cazorla, Michu, or, for that matter, Cabaye).[/quote']

Why he will never be a Steven Gerrard, Mark II.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

;2699763']Even Giroud has stepped up and said new striker' date=' even if his position will be under threat. Top Guy.[/b']

Still expecting no influential signings.

Still we signed that 15 year old Swede. Potential :rolleyes:

Has said this already before this summer. No news, just repeating of his old words (not sure if he has repeated them himself or are some journalists just waking up now). He is focusing on wrong things right now, though. Arsenal needs to buy DM or two, and a CB and then think about forwards if they have time. And even then, they should start from wingers or wide forwards. Not out and out winger, but a creative wide midfielder/forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

£20 mil is far too much though... Cabaye was poor last season' date=' I don't know why you're targeting him. Would he even be an improvement on Arteta?[/quote']

He wasn't bad but would be classified now a possibly injury-prone player. Besides, getting a CM seems excessive now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

I think the ref had a poor overall game for both sides to be honest' date=' nor do I think we were over physical with you. Infact I thought it got quite fierce between the two teams during certain stages.

The big three injuries that happened, Gibbs collided with the back of Weimann head, just both players challenging for the ball. It happens. Ox and Luna both went in for the ball, both missed, ox came of worse... somehow Luna was booked for that and finally Sagna. He came running in and jumping for the ball, which is fine but Benteke didnt ever look like challenging for that and he went straight over him.

To suggest we kicked you off the pitch is daft, bitter and simply not true. We were often bullied off the park last season, the game got quite hot headed in places but I think thats all there is to say.

Kos sending off was harsh, as on first glance I thought he fully wiped out Weimann but he kinda tripped him a little bit, understand why it was given but it was a little harsh. Regarding the second penalty I think its tough, one angle it looks like he got the ball, from others it doesnt look like he got it. Tough call, but I think its a penalty, but then again id probably say that. I think you could of easily lost szczesny before hand mind you.

Regarding our style of play, are we supposed to go away to Arsenal and play you off the pitch? Are we supposed to, or expected to keep possession against one of the teams who do that the best in Europe. If we did that we would get shredded, we pressed hard and play quick counter attacking football. Its our strengths but against less gifted teams we arent just about counter attacking.

Guzan was really important for us on saturday and that game could of easly gone either way. Just delighted it went ours.[/quote']

This is a very sensible post. I already agree with a lot, but even when not, you have put your mind into it and thought of what happened unlike most here, who either cry in panic or try to poke the panicking Arse-fans.

I have to say, very unusually, the other two sensible posts were this time from JCAFC and Infernito. Which brings me to the point where I disagree with you, since now that I have seen the match and watched all the important moments carefully, I do think JCAFC was very much right, the ref was extremely poor and that to disadvantage of Arsenal.

So, first things first, my sincere apologies to JCAFC for wrongly correcting him: the ref was wrong to give that first penalty after letting Villa fumble the advantage he had given them. I had to watch that carefully and actually even consult the laws of the game and application book to realize that I was wrong all the time.

I think there is 0% disagreement on that he actually gave them the advantage. He waited all the way until he saw the shot going wide before he blew his whistle and pointed the penalty spot, so it was not as if Weimann had just not heard the whistle.

The ref, correctly, considered that Villa got equivalent scoring chance to what they would have got without GK stopping the striker. The player got to shoot undisturbed, clear line to goal, nobody stood on his way and the GK had not altered the trajectory of the ball. The ref considered it as an advantage, and rightly so. However, when in those conditions, the player just missed it, referee was wrong to call it back for a penalty. He cannot do it anymore at that point. The rule is as follows:

allows play to continue when the team against which an offence has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalises the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time

That is pretty unclear on what is the given time. However, the application instructions are much clearer on this:

In the event, however, of the fouled player being allowed the advantage then wasting it as a result of a subsequent error (or a colleague who receives the ball immediately from the advantage loses it, or shoots wide of goal, etc.) then play should not be halted to penalise the original offence. (FA, Application of Laws at p. 10 (Law 5.8))

The advantage should have been lost before and not because the player just misses his shot or even loses the ball for his own reason. The call back rule is not made to give the team two chances or to make it sure that they score, but to make sure that if the player, for example, falls immediately after having been fouled, and doesn't get any advantage, then giving the advantage does not cause them not to get anything out of it. But here it was not lost, he got exactly that perfect scoring chance, exactly the one that they would have got without Ssczscezscsny's foul. He just fumbled it. That was advantage given, taken and just badly used.

Also, those who think Szczceszcsny should have been sent off, I agreed first, but that would have made it again wrong to play the advantage, because he cannot give a red card after advantage is played. On a re-watch, however, it is clear he doesn't actually tackle Agbo, but dives expecting a coming shot, and much more importantly, Agbo had already made his decision and given up the ball (was it a bad shot or a good pass?) before he collided with Sczcsseszcsny. Thus, the foul, which was clear, didn't affect Agbo's decision or the scoring chance that came after it, and it was a very border line case even for a yellow. Never a red.

Then there were Koscielny yellow cards. Most importantly, neither one was ever a yellow card foul. There is a disputable foul in each case. I am with you in the penalty situation. It is a hard call, because he takes the ball first or simultaneously. To me, what makes the case bad for the ref is that the best view to it was that of the linesman who said it was no penalty. In itself, it was a controlled, beautiful sliding tackle, and never worth a yellow.

Koscielny's second yellow, I take back what I said and change my position a bit: It is doubtful that there was even a minimal contact. It is particularly suspicious that the player does not fall as if he had been touched when he was in the air but only dives when he is landed. It is unlikely he was touched and pretty unarguable that he did not fall because of the contact if there was any. So, I correct my earlier statement that it could have been a yellow with a really strict line: it could have been a foul, possibly, not a warning. Moreover, the line, as I said already before, was not strict. There were much worse tackles that went without warning or even a foul. One example was Mertesacker's tackle as the last man back in the very same situation, which went uncalled. That was pretty dangerous play.

I fully agree with you that it is wrong to say that Villa players kicked Arsenal guys out of the pitch. You rightly note that two of injuries were mere collisions. Meanwhile, in case of Sagna, he felt over because Benteke kept on backing up and raised his shoulder in contact, which made Sagna to come down destabilized. That is very dangerous play and could kill the other player. It is very understandable if Arsenal players, after having suffered many bad referee decisions, are frustrated to see that going unpunished. Also, getting those fouls called against Koscielny, when much worse were committed against them, must frustrate and I think it is from these events that the in itself unjustified claim that you kicked them off the pitch came from. One effect could be also the correct feeling that the amount of injuries they suffered was one very decisive thing for the outcome of the game. Their conclusion is wrong, but I can see where it is coming from.

I also do think the sensible judgement is that either team could have won it, but with the remarks above, I have to say that whether or not you could have won it without referee mistakes, these mistakes, as it happened, were decisive for your victory. One clearly wrong penalty, one disputable penalty, and one clearly wrong sending off. all profited the same team. That is a lot of advantage given to one team. And aside from that, Arsenal, despite my first call that I had foreseen that with that midfield Arsenal would be walked over, did dominate the game and truly had their chances despite these wrongs, with Ox, Giroud Cazorla, and particularly Rosicky missing a few better than good enough chances. We will never know what they would have done had referee not given those penalties and particularly that red card.

swanseajack: I am not sure if FA can re-consider a red card caused by two yellows, you are certainly wrong about that this could not have been turned over if appealing two yellows was possible (which it might not be). Obviously, the rule is that a red that is rescinded would not even have been a yellow. Now, here there are two yellows that are very, very suspect. Red cards in situations where it was not at all unarguable that there was not at least yellow card foul, have been rescinded. By which I mean that the foul can very arguably be at least a yellow card foul, even a red card foul, while still being rescinded, because it suffices that the panel considering it finds it not even a yellow card foul, not that refs would not have considered it as a red card.

One example is Kompany's red against Arsenal last season. Was it a red on its own is, as Kompany's tackling in general, a matter of dispute. It was also reported at time that FA officials found it shocking that Dean was considered to have made a mistake in sending off Kompany for that Wilshere-tackle. Already that should cause, if it should clearly not be even a yellow, to be not rescinded. Here Poll on it.

However, in this particular case there was a precedent that makes the overturning of his red card directly a wrong decision. Almost identical tackle against ManU, with only difference that there was no contact to Nani (who carried the ball) and thus Kompany only won the ball without causing any other consequence, was awarded with a red card that was never overturned. It is pretty clear: once it was decided to be a clear red card, another time, same tackle, red card rescinded. So, they do rescind red cards from situations where it was easily arguable that it was a straight red card according to their own, very recent case law. With Koscielny against Villa, we actually should discuss whether there were fouls at all, not whether they merited warnings. There certainly would be a case for overturning his red card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

If that is the rule Didi then it isn't really much of advantage given the situation on Saturday.

If the advantage for us was that we had a shot on goal from a tight angle after the defenders had the chance to get back on the line then that's not much of an advantage.

Again, Rugby should be looked at as an example IMO (for many things). If a team has an infringement against them then the advantage should be that play can be brought back for the free kick/penalty within a certain amount of time. I can't see how a team can have an advantage from play moving on for two seconds and them losing the ball. There's no advantage there whatsoever and the defending team have effectively gained more of one in that they have gained possession back indirectly through fouling the opposition. Can you see what I mean? Should the ref had not brought play back on Saturday we would've been more penalised than Arsenal which seems like a huge injustice to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

If that is the rule Didi then it isn't really much of advantage given the situation on Saturday.

If the advantage for us was that we had a shot on goal from a tight angle after the defenders had the chance to get back on the line then that's not much of an advantage.

Sorry, but let us put the things straight:

1. there is precisely 0% doubt that referee let you play the advantage and you played that. He did not call it back when the ball drifted to right, but let you shoot it. After that, he could not call it back. So there really is no argument about that in any case. JCAFC was right: the ref did wrong, he should have either not let you shoot or then not call it back afterwards.

2. Furthermore, he was right to give that advantage. It was precisely the chance you would have get had Szcszscsezscny not tripped Agbo. Agbo had already punted the ball there. Agbo was not going around Szczscescny, he had no room or time for that. He didn't even follow the ball, he punted it on his right, most likely to set up Weimann to the chance he eventually got. No Arsenal player was there to prevent him from shooting, and the angle, though not central, was both reasonable and precisely what he would have got had Szczesny stayed on his feet and not made Agbo fall. Only difference being that he now had an open goal. It was his own bad that he wasted the chance. As to your claim that the defence was given time to get there, it is simply not true. The truth is, that the defenders were there already at level with Szczcesscny and running at the goal. It took less than two seconds for Weimann to shoot the ball after the foul.

The idea of advantage is not to give you a better shot than you were getting, but to let you play if it is considered that you are having as good a chance. Weimann got a shot at open goal. He missed it, embarrassingly, but that doesn't mean he should get a second chance.

And here you should admit it, your own opinion has changed from "that's the rules" to "oh, it was no advantage".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

Why is there even an argument? The first one was a penalty' date=' the second one wasn't. Simple as.[/quote']

the point is that in the first one they were allowed to play the advantage and they wasted it themselves, in which case they should no longer be given the penalty. I quoted the rules in the post above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

Sorry' date=' but let us put the things straight:

1. there is precisely 0% doubt that referee let you play the advantage and you played that. He did not call it back when the ball drifted to right, but let you shoot it. After that, he could not call it back. So there really is no argument about that in any case. JCAFC was right: the ref did wrong, he should have either not let you shoot or then not call it back afterwards.

2. Furthermore, he was right to give that advantage. It was precisely the chance you would have get had Szcszscsezscny not tripped Agbo. Agbo had already punted the ball there. Agbo was not going around Szczscescny, he had no room or time for that. He didn't even follow the ball, he punted it on his right, most likely to set up Weimann to the chance he eventually got. No Arsenal player was there to prevent him from shooting, and the angle, though not central, was both reasonable and precisely what he would have got had Szczesny stayed on his feet and not made Agbo fall. Only difference being that he now had an open goal. It was his own bad that he wasted the chance. As to your claim that the defence was given time to get there, it is simply not true. The truth is, that the defenders were there already at level with Szczcesscny and running at the goal. It took less than two seconds for Weimann to shoot the ball after the foul.

The idea of advantage is not to give you a better shot than you were getting, but to let you play if it is considered that you are having as good a chance. Weimann got a shot at open goal. He missed it, embarrassingly, but that doesn't mean he should get a second chance.

And here you should admit it, your own opinion has changed from "that's the rules" to "oh, it was no advantage".[/quote']

In literal terms, had the ref not pulled it back Szczesny would've got away with stopping a likely goal (or goal scoring chance) without any punishment. That's not right.

And I don't really get your last point at all. I never said we didn't get an advantage, we did, as we got the penalty. If we didn't then we would've lost out. An advantage cannot (or should not) consist of one shot. That's a ludicrous system. The attacking team would remain in the same situation as if the foul had never happened, thus giving the defending team a 'free foul' so to speak.

Bottom line is the situation should never have happened - Gabby ran through half the Arsenal team to even get to that position. If I was a Gooner, i'd be more concerned with my players letting the opposition do that than if a penalty should or shouldn't have been given. The ref shouldn't have been put in that position. Likewise with both of Koscielny's bookings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

In literal terms' date=' had the ref not pulled it back Szczesny would've got away with stopping a likely goal (or goal scoring chance) without any punishment. That's not right.

And I don't really get your last point at all. I never said we didn't get an advantage, we did, as we got the penalty. If we didn't then we would've lost out. [b']An advantage cannot (or should not) consist of one shot. That's a ludicrous system. The attacking team would remain in the same situation as if the foul had never happened, thus giving the defending team a 'free foul' so to speak.[/b]

Let's focus to this and not to the obvious lacuna in Arsenal midfield. That is a whole different issue and I don't understand why it is your concern in the first place. What we are discussing is the fact that the ref gave you double return on that foul by letting you play the advantage and giving penalty when you screwed your advantage yourself.

Now, that the advantage consists of one shot can be true, should be true, and is true.

The attacking team precisely is meant to stay in the situation as if a foul had never taken place, that is: that they have not lost the chance they created because of the foul, or that they got an equivalent chance, is the condition in which advantage is played. Should they lose it due to anything else than fumbling it, it would be called back immediately. But if they just miss that chance, then calling it back to penalty is to give them two chances. That is not how it is, and that is not how it should be either.

I do not understand at all your last sentence. It is not a "free foul". It is simply that ref, as well as Villa players, considered that they had a good scoring chance to play on instead of taking the penalty. It is not a "free foul". In fact, it was detrimental, since Szczezcsczcny affected the situation in no other way than 1. taking himself out of the play, and 2. causing that should Agbonlahor's pass find no player or one of Arsenal's defenders get to the ball to prevent Weimann from shooting, it would be a penalty. Agbo had already played the ball, it was exactly what you were getting, only thing changed being that had you not got that shot you would have been entitled to a penalty. You lost nothing by that advantage, instead due to referee mistake you now got basically "two penalties" in that you first got that chance and then you nevertheless got a penalty.

Rugby rules are of little interest when we discuss the actual football matches and rules applied in them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

From Wiki:

If the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time, the referee may then stop play and penalize the original offence.

I haven't seen the incident (to see how much time elapsed) but I'd say that the advantage to playing on over having a penalty would be a clear shot on a goal protected by at most one player. From what rugger's said, this doesn't seem to have been the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

Quite frankly whilst your bidding for Cabaye in the first place is beyond me,you need a defensive midfielder more than a player like Cabaye which isn't too disimilar to what you already have,whilst I'm sure he'd be playing absolutely brilliant for you guys I don't really see what problems he'd solve,CM is one of the positions your strongest in anyway so why your buying at that position again makes no sense.

It just strikes me as a bit of a panic bid in all honesty,why we'd sell for a fee of £10 Million either is a joke,as Didi and others can attest too I'm not his biggest fan,but his worth way more than that and if the rumours are true that PSG have come straight in with a £15 million bid it doesn't surprise me,you'd probably have to double your original bid which I can't see you doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

It's more the application of rules as opposed to the actual rules themselves that I was referring to when I mentioned Rugby. It's been said thousands of times that Football can learn a lot from other sports and I think it would be of benefit to the game to do so; finally having goal line technology is one benefit that has come from looking at successes of other sports.

What Stuart has put in the quote from Wiki says what i've been trying to put across, but in a much more concise and clear way.

The ref gives the opportunity for the advantage to take place, but if it doesn't then he would be right to pull play back.

I'm not just saying this as it's my team either, if it happened elsewhere I would defend the ref as well. It makes no difference, we scored yes, but I believe the referee was correct to bring it back. I also believe that the referee should not be getting as much stick as he is, because all the contentious decisions that led to goals or red cards etc he got correct. The Arsenal players should be getting stick for being stupid enough to dive in on players.

One player that has avoided a lot of stick mainly due to Koscielny being sent off as he did what he did, Mertesacker went diving in on Benteke as the last line of defence some thirty yards out from goal just after Koscielny went diving in on Weimann. How mental do you need to be as a center back to do something so detrimental to your team? Had Tekkers' touch been better he'd have been in on Szczesny two minutes after scoring a penalty.

Just bonkers defending

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

He was injured' date=' not poor. There's a difference. He still was easily Toon's most important player.

Aside from Bender, none of these would fix your midfield problems in any way, and Cabaye offers much more support to attack than him. Easily the best option out of these five for you.

Or is your plan to play Wilshere and Ramsey in front of defence line again? Neither of them can do that. Wilshere's pressing is notoriously bad, while Ramsey's runs to backup Mertesacker are absolutely clueless, basically leaving Koscielny alone with two forwards all the time. They both take too much time with the ball, Wilshere's possession losses came costly to you in the first round.

Cabaye would improve your team tons. Only thing he lacks is size, and you don't need a big DM, because you have Per coming up to fight for the long balls. All the DM has to do in those situations is to cover up Per, something Ramsey and Wilshere clearly are unable to do.

All this complaining about panic buys is a bit ridiculous. And it seems to me it comes mostly from people tied to other clubs, which makes sense as it is clearly something unsettling Arsenal. That you had to sign before doesn't mean you wouldn't have to sign now. Now you seriously have no other choice but to sign somebody. It was a failure not to sign before the season started, but that does not make signing players now any less necessary. All you have to beware is signing players you don't have use for.

But Wenger hasn't so far gone for that. He overbid Wolfsburg for Gustavo. Not his fault that Gustavo was sold to Wolfsburg regardless of his better bid (by few millions of euros better). Gustavo would have been a right kind of player for you, despite many of you not reckoning him. And he is a top class player. Same with Cabaye. Signing Cabaye is not signing some obscure player to a position you have already covered. It is buying a proven international to a position to which you really have 0 players. Wenger has followed Cabaye for some 4 years now, he must have had the guy on his list already before.

Only thing I wonder is why Wenger buys Cabaye now when he didn't buy the guy when he was available for €5M. To my mind, if he had some reason why he thought Cabaye is not the player he needs, then he should not buy him now either.

While £10M is clearly too low, £20M is still too much money asked now that Cabaye has been injured for most of the last season, even if he has a long history to prove he is not injury prone. With that price, I feel he has to play another full season to get a transfer to a better team. It is bit nasty from Newcastle to ask that much [b']if[/b] he really wants to leave (which might not be the case), seen that they got him under the market price, and I'd suppose final fee will be something like £15M. If not, then Cabaye should probably just play the best season he can and wait for ManU to come sign him during January transfer window or next Summer.

On Wenger's lack of buying, I feel that there has been a similar thing as with Moyes at ManU: he has focused all summer to get a few players who are close to nontransferable (Rooney, Suarez), and forgotten to buy other, at least as much needed players. Had his bid for Suarez or Higuain been accepted, you'd probably have another CB and DM by now. And there were no problems. He has bit unrealistic targets at the moment, and soon it will be too late, because CL games start this week and many of potentially targeted players will soon have featured in a CL match and are no longer option for you lot.

Probably we are going after Cabaye is because of Arteta. We have no cover when Arteta is injured and that left us with only Wilshere and Ramsey. Both of them are incredible players and have a lot of space to improve further but they are no Arteta, a man who can keep our possession and make play more organize. I am sure you do realize when Arteta is not playing our attack and defense are all over the place. The latest example, against Aston Villa. So honestly, I can see why Wenger need Cabaye and it do make sense actually. However, I do agree with many people that we should set DM as a priority over Cabaye. As for the player I listed, I actually think Gourcuff is better because he is a game changer. He can make team win when at his best The only think that is making him a less better player than he seems like is due to his injury. The other players I would agree Cabaye is better because he is much more experienced player.

Anyway, Sagna, Gibbs, Rosicky, Ramsey and Wilshere back on training. It appeared that Sagna was lucky not to injured his neck bone as bad as we thought from the game. Thank god for that as we really needed the highlighted player. I can see Sagna and Mertaesacker as our CB, Jenkinson RB and Gibbs as LB now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

Didi on the replay for the second penalty, prior to Kos foot touching the ball, which I dont doubt it did, his trailing knee collided with Gabbys trailing ankle which sent him falling just before Kos followed through and got the ball.

I actually wouldnt of spotted that without the help of Shearer ha.

The referee was right to give the first penalty, I agree with Rugger that if he had not it was Arsenal who would of gained the advantage from their poorly timed tackle.

I think Kos second yellow was some what harsh but he did kind of dive in, the contact wasnt all to much but from the referees perspective it would of looked alot worse. I think the only decision I can understand Arsenals frustration with is Vlaar not being sent off for a second bookable offense when it was 2-1. For a similar tackle to Kos second yellow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

From Wiki:

I haven't seen the incident (to see how much time elapsed) but I'd say that the advantage to playing on over having a penalty would be a clear shot on a goal protected by at most one player. From what rugger's said' date=' this doesn't seem to have been the case.[/quote']

You might have completely missed my post on this, because I quoted that passage from the laws of the game directly. however, I also quoted the application instructions that are much clearer on it, in fact they leave no doubt about it.

One: see the incident. Two: read the application (quoted above). The decisive fact is that the referee clearly gave them advantage and waited them to materialize it, and when they simply missed the net, he gave them the penalty. And that is against the rules (or the application), because it gives them both, the advantage and the penalty. Only if they lose the advantage due to something else than themselves screwing it, should it be called back. But that was not the case, nor did the ref consider it was the case (clear on video).

Thus, it is inarguable that he did wrong there. The wrong was either to not whistle before Weimann shot (if advantage indeed was already lost there) or to give penalty when Weimann had missed the net (as I think it was, because he was very correct to let them play the advantage). But in any case, after letting Weimann try the goal there, he should not have called it back to penalty, because he then gave them two chances: first to score on advantage and if they fail, then to take the penalty. The decision on whether that shot was advantage was taken before it, and he clearly decided it was good enough chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

Didi on the replay for the second penalty' date=' prior to Kos foot touching the ball, which I dont doubt it did, his trailing knee collided with Gabbys trailing ankle which sent him falling just before Kos followed through and got the ball.

I actually wouldnt of spotted that without the help of Shearer ha.

The referee was right to give the first penalty, I agree with Rugger that if he had not it was Arsenal who would of gained the advantage from their poorly timed tackle.

I think Kos second yellow was some what harsh but he did kind of dive in, the contact wasnt all to much but from the referees perspective it would of looked alot worse. I think the only decision I can understand Arsenals frustration with is Vlaar not being sent off for a second bookable offense when it was 2-1. For a similar tackle to Kos second yellow.[/quote']

im more surprised by this than Didis line (although i agreee didi, any team any time, you take an obvious advantage and bungle it your problem)

Koscielnys tackle was amazing, absolutely nailed it. the look in his eyes was as clear as day he knew hed nailed it, all the commennators agreed. and then the second yellow as well??? Kosc got absolutely screwed over by the ref.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

It's more the application of rules as opposed to the actual rules themselves that I was referring to when I mentioned Rugby. It's been said thousands of times that Football can learn a lot from other sports and I think it would be of benefit to the game to do so; finally having goal line technology is one benefit that has come from looking at successes of other sports.

No doubt football can learn from other sports, but here application is very much in line with the spirit of the laws. The main thing is that you should not be penalised twice for same foul. This is also a more general legal principle.

The idea of giving advantage is not that you can try to score and if you fail to score, then the referee punishes the original offense. That way it would be double punishment, because you could first try once and if you miss it, then you could yet try again. The the idea would be to give you a goal. But that is not the idea.

The idea is to give you the scoring chance you may have lost due to the foul. That is why you are allowed to play the advantage if that can give you an equal chance. Which is up to the referee to decide. The original offense is not after that sanctioned unless you were unable to play the advantage. But if you play that advantage and just don't get a goal with it, then that was your chance and only thing that the ref can do after that is to give a warning to the player who fouled you next time the game stops (something he cannot do when the game is not yet stopped).

I know this is different in some other sports, but I envy pretty much nothing bar video refereeing from them, and even of video refereeing only a very limited version. The most important thing to football is that the time keeps going all the time and more we have the game stopped or called back the closer we get to boring spectacle sports like the American Armegg. In addition, one goal is immense thing in football, much bigger than in most sports. Giving a team two chances to score for one foul is too big a punishment in a sport like football.

What you can argue is whether the ref should have let you play the advantage and consider that shooting position as an advantage, but it is clear that he did so and after that there should be no penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

im more surprised by this than Didis line (although i agreee didi' date=' any team any time, you take an obvious advantage and bungle it your problem)

Koscielnys tackle was amazing, absolutely nailed it. the look in his eyes was as clear as day he knew hed nailed it, all the commennators agreed. and then the second yellow as well??? Kosc got absolutely screwed over by the ref.[/quote']

Watch it again. There is no doubting his knee (trailing leg) struck Gabbys trailing ankle. Its not interpretation, watch it again. Did you watch Motd? They showed it, and its without question. Was a great challenge, just unlucky his knee hit gabby before.

Commentators.... all the pundits agreed on Motd and numerous other shows after watching it on several replays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

Are you guys seeing these Casillas rumors :confused: quite outrageous

But he is on bench and unhappy. That would be a great move for you lot. Not believing it would happen, more likely the press makes it up from you needing a GK and him being on bench, but still, that would be a big thing for you and for whole Premier League. And even all top football. A massive move, very interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Official Arsenal Thread

Just see this link http://www.101greatgoals.com/blog/ref-you-had-a-stinker-all-of-anthony-taylors-dodgy-calls-during-arsenal-1-aston-villa-3/

They even have video compilation where you can see all the unfair decision. Rugger and Magic stop being biased and accept the fact that the referee has been horrible throughout the match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...