Manchester Utd V Arsenal PL

Liam O

RasTa wrote: »

Even Alan Green said it was a peno, in fact I haven't read one journalist saying it was a dive. Leave the hatred at home folks.

but all football pundits are idiots, except when they support my point

Fuhrer

the_pm_of_17 wrote: »

This is exactly what most people are preferring to ignore, cos it doesn't fit their ideals. When you over stretch one leg to reach the ball, the other leg cannot simply stay planted on the spot, it will trail after the other one, and since Almunia dives in and prevents him from correcting that movement, he cannot stay standing.

The point that people against the penalty should be arguing is that Rooney didnt have control of the ball. As he was overstreched to knock it away, he couldnt have recovered and stopped it going out. But I doubt that matters seen as he was taken out.

noodler

the_pm_of_17 wrote: »

This is exactly what most people are preferring to ignore, cos it doesn't fit their ideals. When you over stretch one leg to reach the ball, the other leg cannot simply stay planted on the spot, it will trail after the other one, and since Almunia dives in and prevents him from correcting that movement, he cannot stay standing.

Come on, BOTH legs collapse at exactly the same time.

Like I said, irony is that it would have been a stonewaller if Rooney had stayed don his feet until Almunia's contact actually took him down.

RasTa

Liam O wrote: »

but all football pundits are idiots, except when they support my point

Most pundits are idiots , sports writers seem to have a bit more sense.

I think Wilson from the Guardian sums up the incident the best

The miss looked significant when United equalised on the hour from the penalty spot. There was no suggestion of a dive from Rooney, though what he would have been able to do with Giggs's pass had Almunia left him alone is debatable

noodler

Watch his left leg.

Fuhrer

noodler wrote: »

http://i30.tinypic.com/dvsjdw.gif

Watch his left leg.

His planted right foot gets smashed by Almunia, what point are you trying to make?

Liam O

Fuhrer wrote: »

His planted right foot gets smashed by Almunia, what point are you trying to make?

but you know all those times when you get tripped up and then one leg stays upright? duh :rolleyes:

gosplan

RasTa wrote: »

Even Alan Green said it was a peno, in fact I haven't read one journalist saying it was a dive. Leave the hatred at home folks.

The argument is not 'was it a dive OR a penalty'. It's not that black and white.

Here's one journalist saying exactly what most people who saw the incident are saying: Rooney dove and it was a penalty.

Richard Williams/Guardian wrote:

And when United equalised just before the hour, had Wayne Rooney really been fouled by Manuel Almunia? "A clear penalty," Sir Alex Ferguson said. But neither he nor the referee would have seen the incident replayed in Sky's super slo-mo, which showed the forward's knees buckling before he made contact with the diving goalkeeper's outstretched arms, the two men converging at top speed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/aug/29/premier-league-manchester-united-arsenal

Liam O

noodler wrote: »

Come on, BOTH legs collapse at exactly the same time.

Like I said, irony is that it would have been a stonewaller if Rooney had stayed don his feet until Almunia's contact actually took him down.

In case you can't see, it is a stonewaller. Almunia did take him down. I think you must not understand what irony constitutes

Fuhrer

Hurley?

The Muppet

Keith Hackett the referee's supremo has admitted Wengers sending off was a mistake and he is to recieve an apology. Rightly so.

eddiehead

Boggles wrote: »

Beaten and sent off, yeah he should be delighted. :rolleyes:

Lol, if only it was as black and white as you would like. United are poorer than they have been in a long long time and they will be found out unless SAF spends a good few million on a midfielder.
No matter how you look at it United were blessed to get anything yesterday and that can't continue.

You can stick your head back in the sand now, ok;)

Liam O

The Muppet wrote: »

Keith hackett the referee supremo has said Wengers sending off was a mistake and he is to recieve an apology. Rightly so.

true

Liam O

eddiehead wrote: »

Lol, if only it was as black and white as you would like. United are poorer than they have been in a long long time and they will be found out unless Sir Whiskey Nose spends a good few million on a midfielder.
No matter how you look at it United were blessed to get anything yesterday and that can't continue.

You can stick your head back in the sand now, ok;)

funny, better start than last season. But when Drogba and Essien head off to the ANC we'll see how good Ancellotti is at winning the league.

eddiehead

Fuhrer wrote: »

The only way he would have avoided contact with Almunia is if he jumped over him, as he was already stretching his leg out after winning the ball he couldnt.

And I dont agree that he was collapsing either, he was stretching out on a slick service, the only was for him to regain his balance and not fall over is if he could plant his leg back out in front of himself, as Almunia took his legs out, he had to fall. Not a dive or even close to it.

I just want to say one thing here regarding the peno.

Just imagine the incident happens outside the box.

Now imagine the oncoming keeper with an outstretched hand is an oncoming defender with with an outstretched foot.

Would Rooney have done the same thing? ie: Made an attempt to win the ball knowing it was a nothing ball that he could never do anything with and he would almost certainly end up on the ground.

No, he absolutely would not have, he would jump the tackle allowing the defender to win the ball, knowing it was a lost cause.

The difference here is he attempts to win this "nothing ball" and in doing so knocks himself off balance sending him to the ground

Almunia was wrong to leave his hands there, but Rooney's intent was every bit as dishonest as Eduardo's in midweek. Yes Almunia would have brought him down but due to his own mistake, he could easily have pulled his hands away. Rooney went down because he was off balance, but he knocked HIMSELF off balance intentionally to force the penalty.

Slick surface, thats a good one:pac:

noodler

Heres another great angle from earlier in the thread



Clearly the legs collapse in anticipation of the challenge. Read the entire thread Liam OP and you will see that many of the people arguing he took a spill don't deny it would most likely have been a peno had he stayed on his feet.

Fuhrer

eddiehead wrote: »

I just want to say one thing here regarding the peno.

Just imagine the incident happens outside the box.

Now imagine the oncoming keeper with an outstretched hand is an oncoming defender with with an outstretched foot.

Would Rooney have done the same thing? ie: Made an attempt to win the ball knowing it was a nothing ball that he could never do anything with and he would almost certainly end up on the ground.

No, he absolutely would not have, he would jump the tackle allowing the defender to win the ball, knowing it was a lost cause.

The difference here is he attempts to win this "nothing ball" and in doing so knocks himself off balance sending him to the ground

Almunia was wrong to leave his hands there, but Rooney's intent was every bit as dishonest as Eduardo's in midweek. Yes Almunia would have brought him down but due to his own mistake, he could easily have pulled his hands away. Rooney went down because he was off balance, but he knocked HIMSELF off balance intentionally to force the penalty.

Slick surface, thats a good one:pac:

Yeah, he put himself in a position to be fouled by the opposition goalkeeper. Whats wrong with a striker doing that?

eddiehead

Liam O wrote: »

funny, better start than last season. But when Drogba and Essien head off to the ANC we'll see how good Ancellotti is at winning the league.

What does Ancellotti have to do with this thread?

ShooterSF

RasTa wrote: »

Most pundits are idiots , sports writers seem to have a bit more sense.

I think Wilson from the Guardian sums up the incident the best

Looking at the video I'd imagine Rooney would have let the ball cross his body before smashing it with his right foot if Almunia had stayed on his line.

Nalz

eddiehead wrote: »

What does Ancellotti have to do with this thread?

he is the manager of Chelsea football club, whom many if not the majority think will be the club that will be the biggest challenge to Uniteds title charge this year, the very thing you politely put in doubt with your post.

eddiehead

Fuhrer wrote: »

Yeah, he put himself in a position to be fouled by the opposition goalkeeper. Whats wrong with a striker doing that?

Problem is he didn't let it get that far, he was half way down before Almunia got near him, seriously, how is it not sinking in?

8-10

noodler wrote: »

Heres another great angle from earlier in the thread



Clearly the legs collapse in anticipation of the challenge. Read the entire thread Liam OP and you will see that many of the people arguing he took a spill don't deny it would most likely have been a peno had he stayed on his feet.

I'd like to see a comparison with the challenge Arshavin took in the box (Fletcher?), considering that was given as a fair challenge by the same officials this one looks very soft.

eddiehead

Trilla wrote: »

he is the manager of Chelsea football club, whom many if not the majority think will be the club that will be the biggest challenge to Uniteds title charge this year, the very thing you politely put in doubt with your post.

Thank you for clearing that up, I was simply trying to stop the thread from de-railing. I was talking about how poor United are, not how strong Chelsea are. What happens when the ACN comes around is a matter for another thread.

Fuhrer

eddiehead wrote: »

Problem is he didn't let it get that far, he was half way down before Almunia got near him, seriously, how is it not sinking in?

Because its a stupid point.

If Rooney had thrown himself head first to try and head the ball in would you have called it a dive because he was already on his way to the ground?

No, he was sliding in to win the ball, off balance and a slick surface so he might well have fallen over. Doesnt mean a dive but because Almunia clattered into him, it does mean a penalty

podge018

I don't think anybody is saying it wasn't a penalty. It definitely was. But Rooney dived, or was in the process of diving. If Almunia had pulled his arms at the last second like Boruc did what would you say would be the outcome then?

killwill

eddiehead wrote: »

Lol, if only it was as black and white as you would like. United are poorer than they have been in a long long time and they will be found out unless Sir Whiskey Nose spends a good few million on a midfielder.
No matter how you look at it United were blessed to get anything yesterday and that can't continue.

You can stick your head back in the sand now, ok;)

Why so bitter? I don't understand references like this at all???

Fuhrer

podge018 wrote: »

I don't think anybody is saying it wasn't a penalty. It definitely was. But Rooney dived, or was in the process of diving. If Almunia had pulled his arms at the last second like Boruc did what would you say would be the outcome then?

Its not the same situation as the Eduardo one.


Eduardo for instance was dribbling the ball in and was in perfect control.

Rooney was running onto a long through ball and was stretching to get to it before the defender and the goalkeeper

ShooterSF

8-10 wrote: »

I'd like to see a comparison with the challenge Arshavin took in the box (Fletcher?), considering that was given as a fair challenge by the same officials this one looks very soft.

The Arshavin one should have been a peno too. No United fan's debating it wasn't. That doesn't mean the ref should make a counter-mistake. The reason it's not been argued about though is Arsenal scored from the same attack which cancelled out the ref's mistake in itself.

Nalz

podge018 wrote: »

I don't think anybody is saying it wasn't a penalty. It definitely was. But Rooney dived, or was in the process of diving. If Almunia had pulled his arms at the last second like Boruc did what would you say would be the outcome then?

I think also it can be said it Rooney had managed to slow down and jump over the keeper, what would the outcome be then?

this argument has ran its course, and some of the name calling is a bit much. Some of it that is!

Ashavin was defo fouled, stonewaller imo

killwill

podge018 wrote: »

I don't think anybody is saying it wasn't a penalty. It definitely was. But Rooney dived, or was in the process of diving. If Almunia had pulled his arms at the last second like Boruc did what would you say would be the outcome then?

Rooney might have jumped straight back up and waved off claims of a penalty. I remember Robbie Fowler doing it. At the end of the day it was not a dive he went down easy. Big difference. Plus look at the penalty offence again. It was Almunia's chest aswell that went through Rooney's legs not just his arms so there would still have been contact even if he did pull his arms back.

eddiehead

To be fair, I never said it wasn't or wouldn't have been a penalty. I was reacting to where you said he didn't collapse, I (and many many others) think he did collapse. I think the outcome was inevitable. It's the last I'll say on the peno as people clearly have polarised opinions on it and I doubt anybody will change theirs. OK?

podge018

Almunia's hands are stuck to the turf. And Rooney still manages to drag his feet into contact with them.

killwill

ShooterSF wrote: »

The Arshavin one should have been a peno too. No United fan's debating it wasn't. That doesn't mean the ref should make a counter-mistake. The reason it's not been argued about though is Arsenal scored from the same attack which cancelled out the ref's mistake in itself.

What is funny about that penalty claim though is that most Arsenal supporters I was with yesterday were claiming a penalty for Fletch handling the ball during the tackle not the tackle itself.

Fuhrer

podge018 wrote: »

Almunia's hands are stuck to the turf. And Rooney still manages to drag his feet into contact with them.

Yeah, apprently feet go on the turf when you walk.

RGDATA!

8-10 wrote: »

I'd like to see a comparison with the challenge Arshavin took in the box (Fletcher?), considering that was given as a fair challenge by the same officials this one looks very soft.

the fletcher challenge on arshavin was a definite penalty, don't think anyone's disputing it. obviously it was a decision by the same officials as it's the same game.

ShooterSF

Most points about the peno have been debated to infinity and there is little point in me arguing about it but the bit in bold is doing my head in.

eddiehead wrote: »

I just want to say one thing here regarding the peno.

Just imagine the incident happens outside the box.

Now imagine the oncoming keeper with an outstretched hand is an oncoming defender with with an outstretched foot.

Would Rooney have done the same thing? ie: Made an attempt to win the ball knowing it was a nothing ball that he could never do anything with and he would almost certainly end up on the ground.

No, he absolutely would not have, he would jump the tackle allowing the defender to win the ball, knowing it was a lost cause.

The difference here is he attempts to win this "nothing ball" and in doing so knocks himself off balance sending him to the ground

Almunia was wrong to leave his hands there, but Rooney's intent was every bit as dishonest as Eduardo's in midweek. Yes Almunia would have brought him down but due to his own mistake, he could easily have pulled his hands away. Rooney went down because he was off balance, but he knocked HIMSELF off balance intentionally to force the penalty.

Slick surface, thats a good one:pac:

Had the keeper not come off his line it was far from a nothing ball. Why should Rooney just leave it because the keeper has charged out and stopped him from having the optimum choice? Almunia denied him a simple strike (whether he scores or not is a case of candy and nuts) by charging out so Rooney pushed the ball and got fouled. That's how football is played all over the pitch.

Nalz

If Rooney wasnt brought down, he was impeeded.
Fletcher could have got the line for his tackle. United rode their luck with that decision, also with RVP's two chances.
They were soft on the Arshavin goal though, poor marking and keeper could have done better.
Then they were sloppy in attack, 4 great chances blundered in the last 15 mins. Nani with two, Rooney and then Berbatovs the worst of all.

Fletcher could and should have done better with his 7 yard chance first half. Even enough tbh, Arsenal did look better on the ball and were unlucky - an own goal, hit the bar and a miss from 2 yards. United should have kilt the game when Arsenal went chasing it with those chances in the last 15 mins.

Gladly take the three points, but they need to do alot better. Won't get away with that if Liverpool, Chelsea, even City and the likes come to Old Trafford

ShooterSF

killwill wrote: »

What is funny about that penalty claim though is that most Arsenal supporters I was with yesterday were claiming a penalty for Fletch handling the ball during the tackle not the tackle itself.

Actually my reaction as a United fan when I saw it first was that the only part of him that got the ball was his hand but I was in a pub full of Gooner fans so of course shouted "Great tackle"

Nalz

ShooterSF wrote: »

Had the keeper not come off his line it was far from a nothing ball. Why should Rooney just leave it because the keeper has charged out and stopped him from having the optimum choice? Almunia denied him a simple strike (whether he scores or not is a case of candy and nuts) by charging out so Rooney pushed the ball and got fouled. That's how football is played all over the pitch.

yep well said, i think this one is the clincher - Moving on!!

eddiehead

ShooterSF wrote: »

Had the keeper not come off his line it was far from a nothing ball. Why should Rooney just leave it because the keeper has charged out and stopped him from having the optimum choice?

Whether coming off the line was a good idea or not on the Keepers part, surely the bit in bold is an objective of any keeper?. I've already explained what I think of what happened after.

eddiehead

Trilla wrote: »

Moving on!!

Yes please

Fuhrer

I havent seen it mentioned but I was really impressed with Nani yesterday.


Good skill to beat some players and smart use of the final ball.


Finishing was poor for his chance at the end though.

Necronomicon

Just to lighten the mood, who else lol'd at this



Now that's a dive :pac:

CR 7

Necronomicon wrote: »

Just to lighten the mood, who else lol'd at this



Now that's a dive :pac:

And people questioned Tevez' commitment to the team, Rooney clearly pulls out of that.:pac:

eddiehead

Necronomicon wrote: »

Just to lighten the mood, who else lol'd at this



Now that's a dive :pac:

FFS Ref! High Boot:pac:

Boggles

eddiehead wrote: »

United are poorer than they have been in a long long time and they will be found out unless SAF spends a good few million on a midfielder.
No matter how you look at it United were blessed to get anything yesterday and that can't continue.

You can stick your head back in the sand now, ok;)

Oh dear, best start in 3 seasons. Same ignorance spouted the past 3 seasons, nothing really changes.

Which midfielder do you think Ferguson should buy?

Royale with Cheese

Diaby, he's already got one goal for you.

ShooterSF

eddiehead wrote: »

Whether coming off the line was a good idea or not on the Keepers part, surely the bit in bold is an objective of any keeper?. I've already explained what I think of what happened after.

I was going to leave it but I can't. Put yourself in Rooney's place. A ball is played through to you, your inital plan is probably to let the ball cross your path and hit it with your right foot. However the keeper does his job and rushes out at you (I'm not arguing that was the right or wrong thing to do). Now you no longer have the option of a shot. However the rules state that the keeper has to win the ball if he slides in and catches you. Do you try to get to the ball first and win a peno or simply forget about it and let the keeper collect the ball because he charged out?
I play in goals and if every forward I charged down simply let me take the ball because the shot was no longer on my life would be so much easier.

---

Out of all this my main gripe is and always will be that refs are less likely to give a foul because you manage to stay on your feet even if there is no advantage to give to the fouled player. If that changed only then do I see players actions change.

Unearthly

Boggles wrote: »

Oh dear, best start in 3 seasons. Same ignorance spouted the past 3 seasons, nothing really changes.

Which midfielder do you think Ferguson should buy?

It really is baffling stuff.

You would think Alex Ferguson and Man Utd have earned the right not be written off from any season after 4 games(especially when they have 9 points from those games)

I think it's a case of what people WANT, not what they really think.

killwill

Unearthly wrote: »

It really is baffling stuff.

You would think Alex Ferguson and Man Utd have earned the right not be written off from any season after 4 games(especially when they have 9 points from those games)

I think it's a case of what people WANT, not what they really think.

Well said, it is as much a case of wishful thinking as anything else. Yes United lost two good players but one thing United are good at is grinding out results when needed and I believe we will be there or there abouts next May.