Aaron Ramsey tackle.

Kirnsy

Frisbee wrote: »

I know he said some pretty daft things.

But they were nowhere near as bad as his outlash at Taylor was all I was saying.

I really do expect a statement tomorrow or Tuesday explaining how his comments were made in the heat of the moment blah blah blah.

In fairness any manager who is not passionately furious by a tackle that has broken his own player's leg (and a young one at that) so badly that it's hanging off....for the second/third time in recent years.....has something wrong with them. He was upset and understandably so and IMO should have sent pat rice or someone to do the interview.

There's also the chance he hadn't seen the replay which shows there was no intent so I think anyone criticizing Wenger's reaction isn't taking in the circumstances in which he commented.

ntlbell

leninbenjamin wrote: »

Funnily, I just did before I posted that. They wouldn't have. Ramsey ran across the path of Shawcross, Shawcross lunges to get the ball and his outstretched leg makes contact with Ramsey's ankle/shin area. If he doesn't lunge out with the leg they don't make contact.

lunge? he put his foot out to get the ball as did ramsey??

you must have the new limited edition

Quazzie

ntlbell wrote: »

how many times does it have to be said, they're both going in it could have easily have been shawcross who got his leg broke.

No. No it couldn't have been. Why I hear you ask. Because Ramsey came into the tackle with enouh force to win the ball and get it away, whereas Shawcross came in with enough force to clear ball and man.

Kirnsy

ntlbell wrote: »

I don't know about expect but the potential is there.

they're human beings, not robots.

how many times does it have to be said, they're both going in it could have easily have been shawcross who got his leg broke.

it's not a game of tiddly winks out there which is what arsenal and their fans seem to want.

before any leg breaks arsne was always moaning about any team that got in anyway physical and didn't play on the ground.

i think he seems to forget some of the players he used to manage

Nah there was no chance Ramsey's planted foot could have broken Shawcross's foot unless it hadn't snapped in two. It was shawcross's fault and I can't believe people are trying to justify it. There was no intent and I agree with that but he swung his leg over the ball and that led to Ramsey's break.

Its as if people are using this to get digs in at Arsenal somehow.

leninbenjamin

copacetic wrote: »

No it doesn't, most breaks are due to a combination of normal force and the angles and twisting forces involved. It's extremely difficult to kick someone in the shin with your instep and break their leg without shattering your foot if force is the only question.

I don't think it's really acceptable to shrug it off as an unfortunate coincidence. Shawcross went in hard, very hard. Ramsey was already at full tilt but was never going to make contact with Shawcross. Shawcross surely should have been aware that a low kick like that into the path of an onrushing player has the potential to do serious damage. Yes, angles and twisting are everything, but there is no evidence here to suggest Ramsey's leg was already buckling or twisting, the blame has to fall on Shawcross. Had he exerted less force Ramsey's leg would still be intact.

I know on another day Ramsey would have trod on Shawcross' ankle and it would be a completely different scenario, but Shawcross made the tackle here, the blame is on his shoulders.

ntlbell

playa3 wrote: »

This is the exact same bollocks as with Eduardo to be honest. People using it to get cheap digs at Wenger.

I don't think so Eduardo's was a totally different ball game IMO the intention was to do damage, it looked to me like he was delibertley trying to hurt him

this was a 50/50 were both players went in full whack and ramsey got unlucky

nothing more to it.

I think everyone is probably suprised arsne seen it, since he misses everything else

OPENROAD

Mr Alan wrote: »

i hope so, cause i really feel for shawcross, wat should have been a great day for him yesterday (england call up) ended wit him being sent off unfairly, accidentally breaking a young players leg, and having one of the most respected managers in world football call for you to be punished and imply you did it on purpose.

Straight after the match Mr Alan, as I said maybe he should not give interviews after the match in certain circumstances, managers in general can say things they regret, and he did retract comments after the Eduardo incident, I think you will admit even your own Rafa has come out with some very daft comments over the years and he has probably regrtetted it after.

ntlbell

Kirnsy wrote: »

Nah there was no chance Ramsey's planted foot could have broken Shawcross's foot unless it hadn't snapped in two. It was shawcross's fault and I can't believe people are trying to justify it. There was no intent and I agree with that but he swung his leg over the ball and that led to Ramsey's break.

Its as if people are using this to get digs in at Arsenal somehow.

i think your missing the point.

but that's ok.

Hopefully you'll get it by the end of the thread.

OPENROAD

Kirnsy wrote: »

In fairness any manager who is not passionately furious by a tackle that has broken his own player's leg (and a young one at that) so badly that it's hanging off....for the second/third time in recent years.....has something wrong with them. He was upset and understandably so and IMO should have sent pat rice or someone to do the interview.

There's also the chance he hadn't seen the replay which shows there was no intent so I think anyone criticizing Wenger's reaction isn't taking in the circumstances in which he commented.

Well said.

Mr Alan

openroad, we would've/should've had an apology to shawcross by now if that was the case. hopefully you're right and one comes in the next day mr so

SlickRic

playa3 wrote: »

People using it to get cheap digs at Wenger.

and Wenger using it to continue his vendetta against any team who tries to tackle.

he knows damn well Shawcross' tackle was merely late and not malicious.

he also knows damn well that this '3 severe injuries in 5 years' is not a statistic that can be used to justify what he's trying to say.

he knows damn well it's just been bad luck.

he's not a moron, far from it.

it's a disgrace that he's using this as a means to imply Shawcross is a dirty player, merely as a means of trying to get the FA to make football a non-contact sport.

i understand the emotions after a game after seeing one of your players' badly injured, but he should be more mature and responsible than that by now.

i hope he takes what he said back.

amacachi

ntlbell wrote: »

I think everyone is probably suprised arsne seen it, since he misses everything else

Post 57, ok, who picked out 57 on the how-long-til-someone-mentions-Wenger-missing-everything sweepstake?

ntlbell

Quazzie wrote: »

No. No it couldn't have been. Why I hear you ask. Because Ramsey came into the tackle with enouh force to win the ball and get it away, whereas Shawcross came in with enough force to clear ball and man.

how do you figure that out?

Did someone have a force calculator?

the foot broke because it was planted.

not because of the force.

it has been explained i think 3 times by different people on the thread.

don't let that get in the way tho

OPENROAD

Mr Alan wrote: »

openroad, we would've/should've had an apology to shawcross by now if that was the case.

You really seem to have it in for Wenger.


I will follow your posts with interest when the spotlight is on Liverpool/Rafa ;-)

Quazzie

ntlbell wrote: »

I think everyone is probably suprised arsne seen it, since he misses everything else

ntlbell wrote: »

i think your missing the point.

but that's ok.

Hopefully you'll get it by the end of the thread.

Is the point that this is an opportunity for you to flame and troll again as in the example above.

leninbenjamin

ntlbell wrote: »

lunge? he put his foot out to get the ball as did ramsey??

you must have the new limited edition

haw haw, funny man is funny.

Look at the Photo's, look at the position of Shawcross' feet compared to his centre of gravity, bout a yard in the difference. He was stretching, he was committed. It's a total lunge, he simply wasn't staying on his feet.

Mr Alan

OPENROAD wrote: »

ah come on it is only 24 hours and it is a sunday, you really seem to have it in for Wenger.

I edited my orginal post. I don't have it in for Wenger.

leninbenjamin

SlickRic wrote: »

he also knows damn well that this '3 severe injuries in 5 4 years' is not a statistic that can be used to justify what he's trying to say.

fyp.

It's a highly unusual statistic though. He certainly has the right to feel frustration over it.

ntlbell

leninbenjamin wrote: »

fyp.

It's a highly unusual statistic though. He certainly has the right to feel frustration over it.

He has a right to be especially the eduardo one.

but he's in the game long enough to tell the difference.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

SlickRic wrote: »

and Wenger using it to continue his vendetta against any team who tries to tackle.

he knows damn well Shawcross' tackle was merely late and not malicious.

he also knows damn well that this '3 severe injuries in 5 years' is not a statistic that can be used to justify what he's trying to say.

he knows damn well it's just been bad luck.

he's not a moron, far from it.

it's a disgrace that he's using this as a means to imply Shawcross is a dirty player, merely as a means of trying to get the FA to make football a non-contact support.

i understand the emotions after a game after seeing one of your players' badly injured, but he should be more mature and responsible than that by now.

i hope he takes what he said back.

How many players from other teams has it happened to in those 4 years? Genuine question, as I can't really remember too many leg's being broken of teams that do 'like it up them'

Also, where may I ask did Wenger call Shawcross a dirty player?

Kirnsy

ntlbell wrote: »

i think your missing the point.

but that's ok.

Hopefully you'll get it by the end of the thread.

Lol. instead of being patronizing why don't you make yourself clear.

i was responding to your post:

ntlbell wrote: »

I don't know about expect but the potential is there.

they're human beings, not robots.

how many times does it have to be said, they're both going in it could have easily have been shawcross who got his leg broke.

it's not a game of tiddly winks out there which is what arsenal and their fans seem to want.

before any leg breaks arsne was always moaning about any team that got in anyway physical and didn't play on the ground.

i think he seems to forget some of the players he used to manage

and i said

"Nah there was no chance Ramsey's planted foot could have broken Shawcross's foot unless it hadn't snapped in two. "


Could you explain to me how Ramsey could have broken Shawcoross's leg so when he flicked the ball away??
Please?
To the less educated than your good self.

OPENROAD

SlickRic wrote: »

and Wenger using it to continue his vendetta against any team who tries to tackle.

he knows damn well Shawcross' tackle was merely late and not malicious.

he also knows damn well that this '3 severe injuries in 5 years' is not a statistic that can be used to justify what he's trying to say.

he knows damn well it's just been bad luck.

he's not a moron, far from it.

it's a disgrace that he's using this as a means to imply Shawcross is a dirty player, merely as a means of trying to get the FA to make football a non-contact support.

i understand the emotions after a game after seeing one of your players' badly injured, but he should be more mature and responsible than that by now.

i hope he takes what he said back.

Interesting reading your comments here and in the Liverpool/Blackburn thread suggesting that Blackburn probably kicked the **** out of Liverpool players today, and you didn't even see the mtach. Is it wrong for teams to kick the **** out of Liverpool players but ok for teams to rough Arsenal up

Leiva

Dangerous Tackle ... yes
Clumsy ..................yes
intentional ..............no
red card .................yes

My reason for it been a red card is because the ball was far enough away from him to pull out , no need to lunge clumsy , enough time to pull out and still maintain his own safety .

The "Arsenal roughened up" side show is a disgrace .When any Sunday league or professional puts on a jersey they know this potentially can happen.
If this incident had not happened in this game you would never have heard that debate , it was never that type of game.

noodler

There is absolutely no question the ref was influenced by the reaction and of course the actual aftermath.

I don't think it was particularly malicious and Wenger is bang out of order.

We didn't push for Lucas Neil to have an excessove ban after the Carra/Cisse breaks - it was just unfortunate.

Nonetheless, I feel for the lad, I dislocated my kneecap and it was sticking into my ligaments in November, nowhere near as bad but the fear when you are lieing there and looking at your misshapen leg is seriously disconcerting.

Looks like he will be okay for the start of next season.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

Mr Alan, what exactly do you think Wenger should apologise for?

Nowhere here does he say anything specific about Shawcross

"A three-match ban is ridiculous. How many times have I said in the past that the FA must do something about tackles like this? Players have to respect each other. Those who don't should be punished," The Mirror quoted Wenger, as saying.

"We have lost three players now through tackles like this - Abou Diaby, Eduardo and now Ramsey. People will say it is a coincidence, but I don't believe in coincidences like that. I would say we are not protected enough. Sometimes we are victims, but all I hear is Arsenal don't like it when teams are physical.

"I have no problem with teams being physical, but three broken legs in five years is just too much," he added

or here

I didn't see many bad tackles in the game but this one was horrendous," said Wenger.
"To lose a player of that quality at 19 years of age when he is just starting his career is just horrendous. It is difficult to accept.
"It is the third player we have lost on tackles that are not acceptable - (Abou) Diaby, Eduardo and Ramsey here.
"I am just shocked because that is not football for me. It is not what I like in the game. If you have to live with that I refuse to do that.
"For a boy at 19 years old to be kicked out of a game like that, it is beyond words. I cannot even enjoy the win.
"The players are shocked, it is a bad fracture. He will be transferred to London (on Saturday night) to see if he needs emergency surgery but he will be out for a long time.''

ntlbell

Kirnsy wrote: »

Lol. instead of being patronizing why don't you make yourself clear.

i was responding to your post:





and i said

"Nah there was no chance Ramsey's planted foot could have broken Shawcross's foot unless it hadn't snapped in two. "


Could you explain to me how Ramsey could have broken Shawcoross's leg so when he flicked the ball away??
Please?
To the less educated than your good self.

Ok,

I wasn't going to bother, as I thought it rather obvious.

But ok.

If you reverse it?

and cross got the ball? and his foot planted? and Ramsey was a bit late?

The force both players were at, the speed they were running at, the amount of "force" that was put into the tackle was enough for either one to have their leg broke had it been reversed.

Hence the excessive force argument is redundant.

SlickRic

playa3 wrote: »

How many players from other teams has it happened to in those 4 years? Genuine question, as I can't really remember too many leg's being broken of teams that do 'like it up them'

it's an unusual staistic, but it doesn't prove anything.

those tackles are done all the time in games, and legs don't get broken.

it just happens that Arsenal players' legs are getting broken.

it's sh*t, but it's just unfortunate.

playa3 wrote: »

Also, where may I ask did Wenger call Shawcross a dirty player?

because there is no other reason he would want the ban on Shawcross to be longer that the 3 matches he is going to get, unless he thought there was intent in the tackle.

SlickRic

OPENROAD wrote: »

Interesting reading your comments here and in the Liverpool/Blackburn thread suggesting that Blackburn probably kicked the **** out of Liverpool players today, and you didn't even see the mtach. Is it wrong for teams to kick the **** out of Liverpool players but ok for teams to rough Arsenal up

it's part of the game.

you don't like it, i don't like it, but if it's within the rules of the game, you live with it.

i won't go moaning asking for all their players to be banned because they tried to rough us up.

Mr Alan

are you messing? he's talking about players have to respect eachother and those who don't should be punished, that shawcross' ban should be longer, some arsenal fans really can't see the wood for the trees wit this issue.

noodler

playa3 wrote: »

Mr Alan, what exactly do you think Wenger should apologise for?

Nowhere here does he say anything specific about Shawcross


or here

Eh, he is quite clearly implying Shawcross and other players should face longer bans if the opposition players are going to be out for a long period of time as a result of tackles with them.

That is absolute bullcrap.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

SlickRic wrote: »

it's an unusual staistic, but it doesn't prove anything.

those tackles are done all the time in games, and legs don't get broken.

it just happens that Arsenal players' legs are getting broken.

it's sh*t, but it's just unfortunate.



because there is no other reason he would want the ban on Shawcross to be longer that the 3 matches he is going to get, unless he thought there was intent in the tackle.

He wants the ban to be longer because his player got seriously injured. Not something I would agree with in this case but it's pretty valid, especially in the heat of the moment. Nowhere does he directly condemn Shawcross, but more so this attitude that the likes of Fuller frequently bang on about.

ntlbell

SlickRic wrote: »

it's part of the game.

you don't like it, i don't like it, but if it's within the rules of the game, you live with it.

i won't go moaning asking for all their players to be banned because they tried to rough us up.

I can't recall to many games in the prem where a team was kicking the poo out of another team.

bolton/blackburn etc had rep's for being physical from arsne, because they tackled hard, shoulder barged etc, all very legel.

do we really want it to go down the same route as goal keepers?

it's a physical contact sport.

arsenal want to play united every week.

you pass and shoot, then we pass and shoot.

this is just not going to happen.

SlickRic

playa3 wrote: »

He wants the ban to be longer because his player got seriously injured. Not something I would agree with in this case but it's pretty valid, especially in the heat of the moment.

i don't understand this stance.

just because the player got injured, the one who unfortunately injured him should be banned for longer?

ludicrous.

the tackle was clumsy, a yellow card offense IMO after seeing the replay.

i don't care if it's the heat of the moment; it would not be fair on Shawcross, because he tackled in a fashion most tacklers would. Ramsey just got unlucky.

leninbenjamin

mixednuts wrote: »

The "Arsenal roughened up" side show is a disgrace .When any Sunday league or professional puts on a jersey they know this potentially can happen.
If this incident had not happened in this game you would never have heard that debate , it was never that type of game.

Actually, it's frequently brought up. Anytime we play Stoke or Bolton in particular someone makes a quote to that extent, every time we play these teams many Arsenal fans feel our players get little protection. Most recently it was the Bolton games, they got away with some awful dirty play in those games, including Taylor (iirc) dragging his foot across Fabregas' face after fouling him (in the box, a penalty that wasn't given).

So because 90% of the time you're going to ignore Arsenal discussion in the press it doesn't give you a right to condemn us for such remarks.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

Mr Alan wrote: »

are you messing? he's talking about players have to respect eachother and those who don't should be punished, that shawcross' ban should be longer, some arsenal fans really can't see the wood for the trees wit this issue.

So you think he should apologise for the implications you choose to put to his words? He is, to my eyes, using this as an opportunity to forward his opinion about how teams get praised for playing hard against Arsenal, rightly or wrongly. What he does not do is tarnish Shawcross, but rather this attitude in general.

ntlbell

SlickRic wrote: »

i don't understand this stance.

just because the player got injured, the one who unfortunately injured him should be banned for longer?

ludicrous.

the tackle was clumsy, a yellow card offense IMO after seeing the replay.

i don't care if it's the heat of the moment; it would not be fair on Shawcross, because he tackled in a fashion most tacklers would. Ramsey just got unlucky.

scholes is clumsey, shawcross was with conviction.

there was nothing clumsey about it imo

SlickRic

ntlbell wrote: »

I can't recall to many games in the prem where a team was kicking the poo out of another team.

bolton/blackburn etc had rep's for being physical from arsne, because they tackled hard, shoulder barged etc, all very legel.

do we really want it to go down the same route as goal keepers?

it's a physical contact sport.

arsenal want to play united every week.

you pass and shoot, then we pass and shoot.

this is just not going to happen.

i agree completely.

Mr Alan

he says the tackle was disgraceful and unacceptable and that the ban should be extended and when players have no respect for their opponents they should be punished. you don't think thats directed at shawcross?

OPENROAD

SlickRic wrote: »

it's part of the game.

you don't like it, i don't like it, but if it's within the rules of the game, you live with it.

i won't go moaning asking for all their players to be banned because they tried to rough us up.

So what did you think of Rafas comments when asked if Blackburn players roughed up Liverpool players? Was there a need for him to be sarcastic?

Is it not part of the game, do Blackburn players not have any other choice against the likes of Liverpool, should Rafa not accept this?

SlickRic

ntlbell wrote: »

scholes is clumsey, shawcross was with conviction.

clumsy, as in slightly late.

ntlbell

playa3 wrote: »

So you think he should apologise for the implications you choose to put to his words? He is, to my eyes, using this as an opportunity to forward his opinion about how teams get praised for playing hard against Arsenal, rightly or wrongly. What he does not do is tarnish Shawcross, but rather this attitude in general.

this suggestion it's only arsenal is just nonsense.

do teams not play out of thier skins against united?

do they not try "rough up" any other team in the league?

he should really trying watching a few non arsenal matches.

has he ever watched any of the never ending amount of derby games in the pl?

Mr Alan

OPENROAD wrote: »

So what did you think of Rafas comments to the suggestion that Blackburn players roughed up Liverpool players? Was there a need for him to be sarcastic?

he took the piss out of them. surely you can see the difference?

kmart6

I haven't read through the entire thread but I myself don't think it was a red card tackle, I just think that the result of it, history with Arsenal players and the reaction of players played a part!

I don;t know if this has been mentioned at all....but Kudos to Glen Whelan for the way he reacted to the situation! Instead of losing the plot like some of the Arsenal players he seemed to be very calm and collected throughout the entire situation! You could see him talking to Ramsey trying to calm him, as well keeping him from looking at it! Credit where credits due guys!

Fair play to you Glen Whelan

Frisbee

ntlbell wrote: »

arsenal want to play united every week.

After this season performances... :pac:

Fuzzy_Dunlop

Mr Alan wrote: »

he says the tackle was disgraceful and unacceptable and that the ban should be extended and when players have no respect for their opponents they should be punished. you don't think thats directed at shawcross?

I think he is using the incident to further his opinions in general on these kind of incidents. I do not believe he labelled Shawcross a dirty player, but that in this case his tackle was bad.

OPENROAD

Mr Alan wrote: »

he took the piss out of them. surely you can see the difference?

Is it not disrespectful? Should he not be better than that, and by the way it is a moan at Blackburn, surely you can see that.

SlickRic

OPENROAD wrote: »

So what did you think of Rafas comments when asked if Blackburn players roughed up Liverpool players? Was there a need for him to be sarcastic?

Is it not part of the game, do Blackburn players not have any other choice against the likes of Liverpool, should Rafa not accept this?

am i Rafa? we're not talking about Rafa.

Rafa was sarcastic, and even if he was upset at the fact Blackburn were being physical i wouldn't agree with him.

i'd maybe moan a bit, as i don't think it's how the game should be played. but i'd accept it all the same.

i wouldn't ask for bans and get a complex about the fact i think my team is being singled out for punishment.

Mr Alan

i can't believe how silly some people are being about this.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

ntlbell wrote: »

this suggestion it's only arsenal is just nonsense.

do teams not play out of thier skins against united?

do they not try "rough up" any other team in the league?

he should really trying watching a few non arsenal matches.

has he ever watched any of the never ending amount of derby games in the pl?

Of course it's not just Arsenal. And I personally don't think we get it too much more than other teams(except at Bolton recently). It's the glorifying of it in the media with regards to Arsenal that Wenger, and most Arsenal fans, don't agree with.

FUNKY LOVER

that picture is fake.should be banned for suggesting it was his own fault.has people any sympathy or class