Man United vs Bournemouth

Only people who despise united or are on the rise would excuse this type of ****e like deliberately stamping on someone's head.

It doesn't justify an elbow reaction in sport but when somebody does that no matter in what medium its so humanly understandable to react.
Funny to read the nonsense all the same who argue otherwise
Good read and funny that it's still an ongoing "argument"

greendom

bucketybuck wrote: »

I keep hearing this said but it isn't necessarily true at all, a player with a job to do would easily be focused on doing that job and everything else is secondary. If Ming was fully focused on getting back into position he wouldn't think twice about what his foot just landed on, it could have been a hand or a shoulder or nothing at all considering it didn't trip him up. Who gives a toss, get back into position and worry about it after. I mean, what do you think his manager would say if United scored because Ming stopped to say sorry to an opposition player? He would **** him out of it and rightly so, it isn't a damn playground.

I'm a United fan and I think he meant it, but this idea of "apologising" is a load of rubbish, fully focused highly competitive sports people don't stop in the middle of an attack to apologise for anything.

And why would he apologise to a player who had thrown him to the ground a few minutes earlier?

5starpool

Beasty wrote: »

Could live with that:pac:

Transferring boards type ban lengths to the FA subconsciously there it seems.

5starpool

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Only people who despise united or are on the rise would excuse this type of ****e like deliberately stamping on someone's head.

It doesn't justify an elbow reaction in sport but when somebody does that no matter in what medium its so humanly understandable to react.
Funny to read the nonsense all the same who argue otherwise
Good read and funny that it's still an ongoing "argument"

No one is excusing deliberate stamping to the head, several people though are far from convinced that it was deliberate. Big difference. I hae utd as much as the next man but that plays no part in my view. I would possibly be blinded by the team I support if it were a Liverpool player on the ground there, but it wasn't, and I'm judging the incident from the views I've seen of it, which is all I can do.

5starpool

5starpool wrote: »

No one is excusing deliberate stamping to the head, several people though are far from convinced that it was deliberate. Big difference. I hae utd as much as the next man but that plays no part in my view. I would possibly be blinded by the team I support if it were a Liverpool player on the ground there, but it wasn't, and I'm judging the incident from the views I've seen of it, which is all I can do.

I read so many excusing it. So how is your post even valid?
The mental hoops people jump through

Lol it wasn't deliberate
Cop the **** on

Agent Coulson

Is Zlatan's original stamp being completely ignored by everyone now?


The only indecent anyone can say was on purpose was the elbow the two stamps the one Zlatan and the one by Mings may have been meant or both could have been trying to jump over the prone player and landed short.


Did Zlatan try and say sorry to Mings for landing on him no he dropped to the ground grabbed his ankle maybe to distract from his stamp. Mings may or may not have seen where Zlatan head was when he tried to jump over him while trying to get back to defend his goal like a good defender.


Also Zlatan a black belt in some martial art and without doubt one of the most physically strongest players in the league dropped like he was assassinated when a player shoved him for throwing the elbow no that was just pathetic.

5starpool

Jaysis, have a bit of perspective Mick. You can be 100% positive it was a deliberate stamp on his head given how it played out, ya? If he was looking at his head when placing his foot then, sure, I'd buy it. You are one of the ones being blinded by the team you support I'm afraid.

Get your tinfoil hat ready anyway for the not insignificant chance Mings doesn't get charged. He probably will, but there is a reasonable chance he doesn't I reckon. Probably 70% chance he does, and about 90% chance Ibrahimovic gets charged.

Nalz

5starpool wrote: »

You are one of the ones being blinded by the team you support I'm afraid

A lot of non United supporters thought it was fairly clear he meant it, including Jamie Carragher on sky.

5starpool

5starpool wrote: »

Jaysis, have a bit of perspective Mick. You can be 100% positive it was a deliberate stamp on his head given how it played out, ya? If he was looking at his head when placing his foot then, sure, I'd buy it. You are one of the ones being blinded by the team you support I'm afraid.

Get your tinfoil hat ready anyway for the not insignificant chance Mings doesn't get charged. He probably will, but there is a reasonable chance he doesn't I reckon. Probably 70% chance he does, and about 90% chance Ibrahimovic gets charged.

This is an embarrassment of a post.
And I thought you are a decent poster?!
Continue to convince yourself the stamp was accidentally.
Enjoy the rest of the weekend lads!
I blame myself for reposting in the thread in the first place!

M!Ck^

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Only people who despise united or are on the rise would excuse this type of ****e like deliberately stamping on someone's head.

It doesn't justify an elbow reaction in sport but when somebody does that no matter in what medium its so humanly understandable to react.
Funny to read the nonsense all the same who argue otherwise
Good read and funny that it's still an ongoing "argument"

Nobody is excusing a head stamp.

Surely you realise there's a difference between people saying it may not have been deliberate, and what you are insinuating? It's pretty straightforward.

RoboKlopp

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Nobody is excusing a head stamp.

Surely you realise there's a difference between people saying it may not have been deliberate, and what you are insinuating? It's pretty straightforward.

Ah yes robo in for the blind defence.

Robson99

Everyone seems to forget the reckless challenge Mings put in on Rooney just before the stamp. How did Friend let that go ?..
Some amount of ****e being spouted in this thread by ABU‘s. Some even seen Ibra trying to stamp on Mings ffs
Mings knew exactly what he was doing

M!Ck^

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Ah yes robo in for the defence.

You mean Roho? He wasn't even involved in the incident was he?

Have you seen the actual fouls? Think there's a few stills (not geat tbf) above

5starpool

Sorry, I forgot there was only one way to see everything with no room for different interpretations at all.

I hope now that the FA don't charge Mings but do charge Ibrahimovic, it'd be great craic on here.

Beasty

I'm a United fan and I'm not convinced. Equally there is a fair chance there was an element of intent. However if he really had intended to do some damage I am very sure he could have done. The fact that Zlatan actually got up from it just rubbing his head lends me to think there may not have been intent. However as I've already said only one person really knows and it's not one of us posting here.

5starpool

5starpool wrote: »

Sorry, I forgot there was only one way to see everything with no room for different interpretations at all.

I hope now that the FA don't charge Mings but do charge Ibrahimovic, it'd be great craic on here.

K lol

I know you all hope they dont charge Mings and charge ibra

niallo27

Robson99 wrote: »

Everyone seems to forget the reckless challenge Mings put in on Rooney just before the stamp. How did Friend let that go ?..
Some amount of ****e being spouted in this thread by ABU‘s. Some even seen Ibra trying to stamp on Mings ffs
Mings knew exactly what he was doing

You mean when he got the ball clearly. It was a great challenge.

Beasty

5starpool wrote: »

it'd be great craic on here.

As one who may have to arbitrate on any fallout over here I disagree:P

niallo27

Mick was on the beer all day I think.

niallo27

niallo27 wrote: »

Mick was on the beer all day I think.

Why?

niallo27

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Why?

You seem angry and you won't accept that someone might have a different point of view than you which is not like ya.

Robson99

niallo27 wrote: »

You mean when he got the ball clearly. It was a great challenge.

It was reckless

niallo27

niallo27 wrote: »

You seem angry and you won't accept that someone might have a different point of view than you which is not like ya.

I think it's hilarious that I count 3+ Liverpool fans spending there time on a Sunday night defending Ming's for stamping on ibras head deliberately
So again why have I been on the sauce all day?

Beasty

Beasty wrote: »

I'm a United fan and I'm not convinced. Equally there is a fair chance there was an element of intent. However if he really had intended to do some damage I am very sure he could have done. The fact that Zlatan actually got up from it just rubbing his head lends me to think there may not have been intent. However as I've already said only one person really knows and it's not one of us posting here.

Good post. It's pure speculation whether intent was there or not.

How someone can say for definite either way has me baffled.

The_Kew_Tour

5starpool wrote: »

Jaysis, have a bit of perspective Mick. You can be 100% positive it was a deliberate stamp on his head given how it played out, ya? If he was looking at his head when placing his foot then, sure, I'd buy it. You are one of the ones being blinded by the team you support I'm afraid.

Get your tinfoil hat ready anyway for the not insignificant chance Mings doesn't get charged. He probably will, but there is a reasonable chance he doesn't I reckon. Probably 70% chance he does, and about 90% chance Ibrahimovic gets charged.

You're intitled to your opinion. But your opinion is inconsistent.

You say that he was not looking at him, well neither was Zlatan with the elbow.

But even as a United fan we be laughed at if you said he did not mean it, rightly so.

Tinfoil indeed

fyfe79

Nalz wrote: »

A lot of non United supporters thought it was fairly clear he meant it, including Jamie Carragher on sky.

And a few didn't, such as the two lads on MOTD last night (well, they said it's very hard to tell and nobody knows for sure).

My take on it is that Zlatan's initial stamp wasn't deliberate, and Mings wasn't deliberate either. Everything happens so fast, but even when watching in slow motion it's impossible, for me, to tell whether there is any intent by either.

The_Kew_Tour

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Good post. It's pure speculation whether intent was there or not.

How someone can say for definite either way has me baffled.

You said both should have been sent off earlier.

niallo27

M!Ck^ wrote: »

I think it's hilarious that I count 3+ Liverpool fans spending there time on a Sunday night defending Ming's for stamping on ibras head deliberately
So again why have I been on the sauce all day?

Can you show me these posts because I have not read them.

The_Kew_Tour

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

You said both should have been sent off earlier.

They should have.

The_Kew_Tour

RoboKlopp wrote: »

They should have.

No intent should mean no sending off. Thats inconsistent.

The_Kew_Tour

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

No intent should mean no sending off. Thats inconsistent.

Both looked worthy of reds.

Only two people know the intent I'd imagine.

fullstop

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Only people who despise united or are on the rise would excuse this type of ****e like deliberately stamping on someone's head.

It doesn't justify an elbow reaction in sport but when somebody does that no matter in what medium its so humanly understandable to react.
Funny to read the nonsense all the same who argue otherwise
Good read and funny that it's still an ongoing "argument"

Any comment on Ibra's stamp?

The_Kew_Tour

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Both looked worthy of reds.

Only two people know the intent I'd imagine.

Still does not add up. If no intent its no sending off. But you want Mings sent off.

Fair enough but its not a booking if no intent.

5starpool

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

You're intitled to your opinion. But your opinion is inconsistent.

You say that he was not looking at him, well neither was Zlatan with the elbow.

But even as a United fan we be laughed at if you said he did not mean it, rightly so.

Tinfoil indeed

I didn't refer to the Ibrahimovic incident at all really other than to say I think it is more likely that he gets charged than Mings.

If if was a deliberate stamp on the head it should be a 6 month ban at least, I'm just far from convinced that it was. There was nothing unnatural about the way his foot came down as there would be if it was a stamp.

I don't care that ye think I'm being biased. While I don't hide the fact that I take pleasure in utd doing badly or having decisions go against them, I generally don't go out of my way to state things I don't actually believe just to start/take part in an argument.

ebbsy

RoboKlopp wrote: »

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

No intent should mean no sending off. Thats inconsistent.

Both looked worthy of reds.

Only two people know the intent I'd imagine.

Somebody on here talking sense at least.

They both knew what they were doing.

Flint Fredstone

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

You said both should have been sent off earlier.

Some people just can't help but tie themselves in knots when there's an agenda at play.

The_Kew_Tour

5starpool wrote: »

I didn't refer to the Ibrahimovic incident at all really other than to say I think it is more likely that he gets charged than Mings.

If if was a deliberate stamp on the head it should be a 6 month ban at least, I'm just far from convinced that it was. There was nothing unnatural about the way his foot came down as there would be if it was a stamp.

I don't care that ye think I'm being biased. While I don't hide the fact that I take pleasure in utd doing badly or having decisions go against them, I generally don't go out of my way to state things I don't actually believe just to start/take part in an argument.

I have no problem with you disagreeing. Its a forum for discussion. And you know what you may be right, I dont think you are, but from what I see it was intent. Just the look before and actions after.

Its just the inconsistency in some posts I find bit strange.

I dont mind the biased or unbiased posts. We will always give the 50/50s or even more the for our own side.

The_Kew_Tour

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Still does not add up. If no intent its no sending off. But you want Mings sent off.

Fair enough but its not a booking if no intent.

Both looked red to me and many others.

How are we supposed to know if they intended it? Can't imagine either will admit it. The ref obviously thought not but that may well be overturned.

5starpool

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

I have no problem with you disagreeing. Its a forum for discussion. And you know what you may be right, I dont think you are, but from what I see it was intent. Just the look before and actions after.

Its just the inconsistency in some posts I find bit strange.

I dont mind the biased or unbiased posts. We will always give the 50/50s or even more the for our own side.

Fair enough, Ijust don't think I've been inconsistent talking about this.

I said before that I think both will be charged by the FA, but not because I think both fully deserve to be charged. it'll be both or neither I reckon, depends what way the ref wants to spin his report.

The_Kew_Tour

ebbsy wrote: »

Somebody on here talking sense at least.

They both knew what they were doing.

Only for the poster to question if they actually knew what they were doing.