Manchester Utd V Arsenal PL

Fuhrer

Mr Alan wrote: »

Funny how quickley your opinion changed.

You on the Eduardo incident;



surely if contact is made with Rooney AFTER he has already started his dive (which he clearly had) then its a dive by Rooney & can't be a penalty when contact is made.

There wasnt slight contact with Rooney, Almunia cut across him and smashed into him, Eduardo kicked his leg back and hit Boruc.


You really saying that you cant tell the difference between the two?

You really expect people to believe that?

Nalz

Mr Alan wrote: »

Funny how quickley your opinion changed.

You on the Eduardo incident;



surely if contact is made with Rooney AFTER he has already started his dive (which he clearly had) then its a dive by Rooney & can't be a penalty when contact is made.

one big thing is different here, although I think Rooney collapsed before he was touched, Almunia impeeded or Rooneys run. Boruc did not impeed Eduardo. I don't know where to stand on this, but that point was pointed out to me and to be fair its an interesting one. Can the keeper leave there arms body out like that as a player is running in, play none of the ball but make it look like he was going for it, and thus make the forward player move around him after the ball was played. If Almunia ran out and stood in front of rooney it would be impeeding

not my point, but it was well discussed and I found it interesting!

SlickRic

Fuhrer wrote: »

No Alan the point is that Rooney was fouled and Eduardo wasnt.

this is not the point people are trying to make.

Fuhrer wrote: »

everyone excepts it was a foul except for bitter pool fans it appears.

99% of fans, be it Pool, Arsenal or whoever accept it was a foul. the point generally being made is that Rooney was on his way down before contact was made. Thus, if Almunia had stopped and not fouled him, Rooney would have looked as stupid as Eduardo.

How many different ways can it be put?

newbie2

Poor Wayne, looks like his legs gave way - I hope he'll be better fro next week !

3hn2givr7mx1sc

Mr Alan wrote: »

Actually, football is a contact sport.

But i'll accept its a grey area.

Yes but you have to get the ball before the player.

It was in no way similar to Eduardo, any intelligent striker would have done the same as Rooney, whereas only a tool would have done what Eduardo did.

If you want to give out about diving have a look at this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GKXAKQY-0Y

kida

hblock21 wrote: »

You can clearly see that his knees were bending BEFORE Almunia touched him. And I've only seen it once.

be some footballer if he could run without bending his knees

Was there contact with Rooney? Yes
Did the keeper get the ball first? No

WIZE

Its still a peno.

A Primal Nut

If Rooney isn't punished like Eduardo, its a disgrace. The only reason there was contact was because Rooney dived onto Almunia. And if you are getting into retrospectively dealing with all incidents Fletcher should be banned for his 2-footed challenge on Arshavin when he was the last man.

Fuhrer

BVB wrote: »

Its still a peno.

You're not thinking in the same alternative dimension that Mr Alan is where he saw what happened if Almunia didnt come out.

Mr Alan

A Primal Nut wrote: »

And if you are getting into retrospectively dealing with all incidents Fletcher should be banned for his 2-footed challenge on Arshavin when he was the last man.

This is the ridiculous situation Uefa have put themselves into for European comps this year.

CR 7

Mr Alan wrote: »

Funny how quickley your opinion changed.

You on the Eduardo incident;



surely if contact is made with Rooney AFTER he has already started his dive (which he clearly had) then its a dive by Rooney & can't be a penalty when contact is made.

Whats funny is that liverpool fans are more aggrieved about this decision than Arsenal fans. This might explain the motivation behind a lot of peoples' sides of the argument. I expect similarly incisive investigation and outcry at gerard's next dive.

Clanket

Fuhrer wrote: »

So?


Just because he didnt get out of the way of Almunia taking him down, you dont think its a foul? Every Player is obligated to step back and get out of the way of the keeper when he comes charging out for the ball?

Do you agree that his knees were bending to go down before Almunia touched him without his feet coming up from the ground? And if you agree then you cannot say that Almunia took him down, coz he was already going down.

BVB wrote: »

What do you mean he made no effort to run . He got to the ball first .

Yes, he touched the ball then proceeded to go down, before Almunia touched him. It's clear as day from the replays. He nicked the ball then bent his knees to go down, making no effort to continue running. Almunia did not cause him to go over. He did it himself.

WIZE

Fuhrer wrote: »

You're not thinking in the same alternative dimension that Mr Alan is where he saw what happened if Almunia didnt come out.

Yeah .with the speed Rooney was running the ball would have went wide and it would have been a goal kick.
Goalkeepers mistake which cost Arsenal .

WIZE

Alofthedunnes wrote: »

He nicked the ball then bent his knees to go down, making no effort to continue running. Almunia did not cause him to go over. He did it himself.

Unless your a race horse there is no way rooney could have out run the Goalkeepers tackle .

Fuhrer

Alofthedunnes wrote: »

Do you agree that his knees were bending to go down before Almunia touched him without his feet coming up from the ground? And if you agree then you cannot say that Almunia took him down, coz he was already going down.

No, I agree his knees are bending because hes doing that thing, you know, whats it called? Ah yeah, moving.

Rooney was stretching to get to the ball before Almunia came out and fouled him. Why not play the other what if scenario? If Almunia hadnt come out for it Rooney would have been able to easily collect the ball and score. Either is just as plausiable because neither happened. Rooney didnt dive and Almunia didnt stay on his line.

kida

It would have been the same result even IF IT COULD be deemed Rooney was going down, he would have been caught by the keeper. This is the key difference.

SlickRic

the_pm_of_17 wrote: »

Whats funny is that liverpool fans are more aggrieved about this decision than Arsenal fans.

this is cr*p.

no Pool fans feel aggrieved; Mr Alan seems as though he might be, but he doesn't speak for us all. (with all due respect Al!)

it was a damn penalty.

the big point coming out of this week with Eduardo was the mentality in the modern game to dive. rooney exhibited this mentality by falling before the contact would have caused him to fall. he was just lucky Almunia hit him, because he was on the ground regardless.

again, definite penalty, but rooney was falling, thus he's not really that much different to...what was it you called Eduardo at Old Trafford?....oh yes, a cheat.

puntosporting

To be fair to Shrek if he did not bend the knees before contact he would have been rightly smashed and possibly injured!
Course he played for it but the contact is there for all to see he did his job as a striker!
Eduardo failed miserably in his job made it all too obvious that he was diving!
Like it or not, i dont like it but players will allways seek to get one off the ref!

Xavi6

Threads merged.

One is more than enough

Mr Alan

i'm not particularly aggrieved, just thought it was fairly shocking the reception Eduardo got at OT, and has gotten in general over the last week, yet Rooneys actions were the exact same as Eduardos and there's not a peep about it.

NukaCola

BVB wrote: »

Yeah .with the speed Rooney was running the ball would have went wide and it would have been a goal kick.
Goalkeepers mistake which cost Arsenal .

Rooney was falling before Alumina made contact. Keeper didn't get the ball and then made contact with Rooney. It was a peno even though Rooney played for it.

Clanket

Fuhrer wrote: »

Rooney was stretching to get to the ball before Almunia came out and fouled him. Why not play the other what if scenario? If Almunia hadnt come out for it Rooney would have been able to easily collect the ball and score. Either is just as plausiable because neither happened. Rooney didnt dive and Almunia didnt stay on his line.

If you look at Rooney's left leg after he touches the ball, he makes no effort to plant it in the ground to get some balance. He drags it along and lets his right leg make contact with Almunia then collapses.

It's a very contentious one. Almunia was having a brain burp coming out but I definately think Rooney was looking for the peno.

At the end of the day it was given and United got the points. Just wanted to see what people thought about it.

Fuhrer

Mr Alan wrote: »

i'm not particularly aggrieved, just thought it was fairly shocking the reception Eduardo got at OT, and has gotten in general over the last week, yet Rooneys actions were the exact same as Eduardos and there's not a peep about it.

No, they werent.


Eduardo Dived, Rooney was fouled.

WIZE

Mr Alan wrote: »

i'm not particularly aggrieved, just thought it was fairly shocking the reception Eduardo got at OT, and has gotten in general over the last week, yet Rooneys actions were the exact same as Eduardos and there's not a peep about it.

I think there is a big difference between getting tipped of getting crashed into

Mr Alan

Fuhrer wrote: »

No, they werent.


Eduardo Dived, Rooney was fouled.

Rooney was fouled, after he dived.

Fuhrer

Mr Alan wrote: »

Rooney was fouled, after he dived.

Funny, I dont recall seeing Rooney diving, getting back up and being fouled. Only remember seeing him being fouled but I was only watching the game on the telly, not Mr-Alan-Vision.

WIZE

BumbleBee123 wrote: »

Rooney was falling before Alumina made contact. Keeper didn't get the ball and then made contact with Rooney. It was a peno even though Rooney played for it.

Rooney played for it yes but he new the keeper would make the mistake .
Hence Rooney didn't dive but he new the keeper would crash into him getting the peno

Mr Alan

Fuhrer wrote: »

Funny, I dont recall seeing Rooney diving, getting back up and being fouled. Only remember seeing him being fouled but I was only watching the game on the telly, not Mr-Alan-Vision.

the gifs of the incidenet show it quite clearly.

A Primal Nut

BVB wrote: »

Unless your a race horse there is no way rooney could have out run the Goalkeepers tackle .

This is rediculous - you can't call it a penalty because of what would have happened had Rooney stayed on his feet. If Rooney didn't dive, then yes, it is 99% certain he would have hit Almunia fell over and a penalty would have been given - no complaints. But you can't base this on what would have happened. The fact is Rooney went down on purpose (don't give me this lost momentum crap) because his instinct is to dive and fell on Almunia who was on the floor and then there was contact. Its a clear dive anyone can see that.

Fuhrer

Mr Alan wrote: »

the gifs of the incidenet show it quite clearly.

The ones that show Rooney winning the ball and then getting fouled?


No Mr Alan, they show the incident quite clearly but not how you seem to think it happened.

Mr Alan

They show Rooney winning the ball, falling to the ground, then Alumunia touching him.

In that order.

A Primal Nut

kida wrote: »

It would have been the same result even IF IT COULD be deemed Rooney was going down, he would have been caught by the keeper. This is the key difference.

Its not a key difference - you can't give a penalty based on what would have happened or what might have happened. By that logic if someone takes a shot, and someone blocks the ball with his hand, an automatic goal should be given (rather than a penalty). Football rules should be about absolute not what would have happened or might have happened. Rooney dived, what might have happened after is irrelevant.

Fuhrer

Mr Alan wrote: »

They show Rooney winning the ball, falling to the ground, then Alumunia touching him.

In that order.

No they dont, they show Rooney winning the ball while stretching out to win it, then getting taken out.


In that order.

A Primal Nut

SlickRic wrote: »

Rooney was just lucky Almunia hit him

No, Rooney hit Almunia when he dived on top of him. If anything a free kick to Arsenal.

NukaCola

BVB wrote: »

Rooney played for it yes but he new the keeper would make the mistake .
Hence Rooney didn't dive but he new the keeper would crash into him getting the peno

Thats the definition of playing for a peno alright, which is what i said.
I didn't say he dived.

Fuhrer

A Primal Nut wrote: »

No, Rooney hit Almunia when he dived on top of him. If anything a free kick to Arsenal.

Yeah, its come to this.

event

Mr Alan wrote: »

i'm not particularly aggrieved, just thought it was fairly shocking the reception Eduardo got at OT, and has gotten in general over the last week, yet Rooneys actions were the exact same as Eduardos and there's not a peep about it.

thats the difference

when any english player does it, its not diving, its drawing the foul, or being clever.

Fuhrer

event wrote: »

thats the difference

when any english player does it, its not diving, its drawing the foul, or being clever.

And now its come to this.

WIZE

A Primal Nut wrote: »

No, Rooney hit Almunia when he dived on top of him. If anything a free kick to Arsenal.

WTF

FutureGuy

Rooney is a smart experienced player.

He knew if he could get the ball around Almunia, the keeper was going to floor him. He started going down before Almunia made contact.

Did Rooney dive? Yes he did.
Did Almunia make an error? Yes he did.
Was it a penalty? Yes it was. Almunia make clear contact due to a mistimed attempt to get to the ball.

I'm a United fan, and Mr. Alan is spot on below. Ball, dive, foul. In that order. You can clearly see Rooney getting to the ball right before he starts dragging his legs to go down.

CR 7

Can anyone honestly say that at the speed it happened in this video: Here(around 7.15) you can come to any other conclusion than: Rooney was sprinting at full speed, which is in the top 5 sprint speeds in the premier league. Almunia was coming towards him too fast to be able to pull out of the challenge. There was not enough time between Rooney touching the ball and Almunia contacting him to even contemplate diving. At the speed we can watch it, Rooney touches the ball and Almunia slides through Rooney instantaneously.

Mr Alan

event wrote: »

thats the difference

when any english player does it, its not diving, its drawing the foul, or being clever.

Fuhrer wrote: »

And now its come to this.

Its true. Rooney, Gerrard, Terry, Cole etc get away with murder cause of their nationality.

TonyD79

FutureGuy wrote: »

Rooney is a smart experienced player.

He knew if he could get the ball around Almunia, the keeper was going to floor him. He started going down before Almunia made contact.

Did Rooney dive? Yes he did.
Did Almunia make an error? Yes he did.
Was it a penalty? Yes it was. Almunia make clear contact due to a mistimed attempt to get to the ball.

I'm a United fan, and Mr. Alan is spot on below. Ball, dive, foul. In that order.

Its a CLEAR peno. If Almunia hadnt touched Rooney then it wouldnt been a foul. The fact is Almunia's dodgy goalkeeping has CLEARLY cost Arsenal a result againt Man United two games running now.

FutureGuy

the_pm_of_17 wrote: »

Can anyone honestly say that at the speed it happened in this video: Here(around 7.15) you can come to any other conclusion than: Rooney was sprinting at full speed, which is in the top 5 sprint speeds in the premier league. Almunia was coming towards him too fast to be able to pull out of the challenge. There was not enough time between Rooney touching the ball and Almunia contacting him to even contemplate diving. At the speed we can watch it, Rooney touches the ball and Almunia slides through Rooney instantaneously.

Completely disagree. Rooney KNEW the second he was going one on one with the keeper that he wasn't going to get a viable shot on goal...why else did he not try and control the ball? He had to get a touch (any touch) so that when Almunia did eventually clatter him, it was a penalty.

FutureGuy

TonyD79 wrote: »

Its a CLEAR peno. If Almunia hadnt touched Rooney then it wouldnt been a foul. The fact is Almunia's dodgy goalkeeping has CLEARLY cost Arsenal a result againt Man United two games running now.

I'm not debating the fact it was or was not a penalty. It was clearly a pentalty. I'm saying Rooney was looking for it the second he went one-on-one.

Fuhrer

Mr Alan wrote: »

Its true. Rooney, Gerrard, Terry, Cole etc get away with murder cause of their nationality.

Yeah, the way Rooney got away with being fouled is quite the disgrace.

Mr Alan

FutureGuy wrote: »

I'm a United fan, and Mr. Alan is spot on below. Ball, dive, foul. In that order. You can clearly see Rooney getting to the ball right before he starts dragging his legs to go down.

the_pm_of_17 wrote: »

Can anyone honestly say that at the speed it happened in this video.

this is the big issue for me, and one i don't know the answer to. can the correct call ever be made by an official in this instance?

IMO Its impossible for a ref to make a call in this situation with the speed everything happens at.

This is why i'm not slating the ref or even saying that it was a shocking peno decision, i think refs have to give the peno in this circumstance.

If we were in a perfect world, the ref would blow up as a foul by Rooney (his dive) and then there would not be a peno to be discussed, but the breakneck speeds the game is played at make that literally impossible, so it has to be a peno. which means that although Rooney did dive, a peno was probably the only call that can be made.

its the attitude displayed by the media in England & Utd fans about Eduardos dive that makes it especially irritating.

Boggles

Jesus Al, your on form today!

GreeBo

Watch the gifs again and watch Rooneys left leg. he drags it along the ground for ages to make sure it makes contact with Almunia.
Im a UTD fan and I think he played for the penalty.

Did Almunia achieve anything by making contact (With the already surfing Rooney?) No as the ball was long gone.
Did Rooney achieve anything by the contact? Yes, a penalty.

Penalty stands but Rooney should be brought up in a review and penalised for it.

Pighead

Mr Alan wrote: »

If we were in a perfect world, the ref would blow up as a foul by Rooney (his dive) and then there would not be a peno to be discussed, but the breakneck speeds the game is played at make that literally impossible, so it has to be a peno. which means that although Rooney did dive, a peno was probably the only call that can be made.

Rooney making a meal of it is irrelevant, the FACT is he was fouled in the box.

therefore-penalty.

Would you not agree?