Arsenal Vs Manchester United : BT Sports and others @ 17:30

Rumple Stillson

jaykay74 wrote: »

My point is that the quote below is a lot of bollocks that means you either cant tell time, are a liar or a wind up merchant.

He looked at him for a few seconds before diving in.

If you watch the tackle in slow motion, he was definitely looking at him for a few seconds.

PhlegmyMoses

Radharc na Sleibhte wrote: »

The defence of the performance yesterday tells you all you need to know. If they think the only reason Arsenal peppered their goal is because they scored two goals early on, they will learn a harsh lesson next weekend. United are there for the taking against a side not so wasteful and vulnerable as Arsenal eg Manchester City.

City are definitely the better team, but this is turning into a serious season for United. Trending toward 85+ points away win against Arsenal, home win against Spurs and away draw at Anfield.

niallo27

jaykay74 wrote: »

My point is that the quote below is a lot of bollocks that means you either cant tell time, are a liar or a wind up merchant.

He looked at him for a few seconds before diving in.

It's too easy to just peddle the wind up crap though if you don't have an argument back. He did look at him before diving in it was clear he did. Did you actually see the tackle.

niallo27

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

City are definitely the better team, but this is turning into a serious season for United. Trending toward 85+ points away win against Arsenal, home win against Spurs and away draw at Anfield.

Yes it looks like it. They are quiet unlucky city are in such form otherwise they would be favourites for the league.

Cantona's Collars

Rumple Stillson wrote: »

If you watch the tackle in slow motion, he was definitely looking at him for a few seconds.

If you fast forward then he looked at him for a millisecond.

jaykay74

niallo27 wrote: »

It's too easy to just peddle the wind up crap though if you don't have an argument back. He did look at him before diving in it was clear he did. Did you actually see the tackle.

FFS, do you know what a few seconds means. This place is gone to dogs. easy know why a lot of the regulars gave it up. Good luck.

niallo27

jaykay74 wrote: »

FFS, do you know what a few seconds means. This place is gone to dogs. easy know why a lot of the regulars gave it up. Good luck.

What ****en difference does it make if it was 2 seconds or 10 he looked at him before he dived in. I am not sure what you are having difficulty with. Do you think he looked at him or not.

TheDoctor

Think we can drop the “dived in” bs.

Anyone with working eyes can see he was still standing on his two feet.

The absolute opposite of this “diving in” nonsense

Quazzie

niallo27 wrote: »

What ****en difference does it make if it was 2 seconds or 10 he looked at him before he dived in. I am not sure what you are having difficulty with. Do you think he looked at him or not.

You're wasting your time. They can't refute what you are saying so instead will pick pedantically at your use of a frequently used expression as if somehow that makes them right.

TheDoctor

I assume that’s a go at me.

I don’t think it’s pedantic to dismiss an action that didn’t occur in the above description of the event

Quite easy to dismiss a lie, even a commonly used expression if it’s still a lie

Quazzie

TheDoctor wrote: »

I assume that’s a go at me.

I don’t think it’s pedantic to dismiss an action that didn’t occur in the above description of the event

Quite easy to dismiss a lie, even a commonly used expression if it’s still a lie

Try reading it and applying the context. Do you think Pogba was aware of his severe his tackle was as he was making it?

TheDoctor

I don’t think it was even a tackle.

Bellerin made an unusual tackle motion (not sure what sort of a tackle it was) and Pogba in his running motion stood on his leg (Pogba didn’t make an unnatural motion with his leg to try and step on him, if Bellerin hadn’t put his leg out Pogba would have just stepped normally)

Now the question of the red card, was it an out of control reckless tackle, not in my opinion as he stayed on his feet and had full control of his body.

Was it dangerous and could have injured his opponent, yes it was and I can see why it was a red card.

See how I described all the above without false hyperbole? In context or not expressions such as “diving in” is still fake news.

Quazzie

TheDoctor wrote: »

I don’t think it was even a tackle.

Bellerin made an unusual tackle motion (not sure what sort of a tackle it was) and Pogba in his running motion stood on his leg (Pogba didn’t make an unnatural motion with his leg to try and step on him, if Bellerin hadn’t put his leg out Pogba would have just stepped normally)

Now the question of the red card, was it an out of control reckless tackle, not in my opinion as he stayed on his feet and had full control of his body.

Was it dangerous and could have injured his opponent, yes it was and I can see why it was a red card.

See how I described all the above without false hyperbole? In context or not expressions such as “diving in” is still fake news.

So it was Bellerin's fault that Pogba stood on him. Thanks for clarifying your view on it. And you also think that even though Pogba "had full control of his body" and he still stood on Bellerin, it wasn't a red card. Perfectly clear.

PhlegmyMoses

Who cares? Pogba will be banned for 3 games no matter what and United won putting them 7 ahead of Arsenal.

TheDoctor

Your inability to read my second last paragraph is the most alarming thing about your comment

Rumple Stillson

TheDoctor wrote: »

I don’t think it was even a tackle.

Bellerin made an unusual tackle motion (not sure what sort of a tackle it was) and Pogba in his running motion stood on his leg (Pogba didn’t make an unnatural motion with his leg to try and step on him, if Bellerin hadn’t put his leg out Pogba would have just stepped normally)

Now the question of the red card, was it an out of control reckless tackle, not in my opinion as he stayed on his feet and had full control of his body.

Was it dangerous and could have injured his opponent, yes it was and I can see why it was a red card.

See how I described all the above without false hyperbole? In context or not expressions such as “diving in” is still fake news.

I agree he was the victim of circumstance and timing. Still don't see anything but a 3 game ban tho. So in the end, the intricacies are probably irrelevant.

Rumple Stillson

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

If you fast forward then he looked at him for a millisecond.

That was my joke!

Mushy

Quazzie wrote: »

So it was Bellerin's fault that Pogba stood on him. Thanks for clarifying your view on it. And you also think that even though Pogba "had full control of his body" and he still stood on Bellerin, it wasn't a red card. Perfectly clear.

Not Bellerin's fault, but the method of the tackle was utterly bizarre. It seemed Bellerin was scared of any potential collision, he effectively ducked out of the way. Still a red card, but not intentional.

Oddly enough, looking at Bellerin through a few instances in that game, it looked like he was actively avoiding collisions. He did the same to Young too, odd tackle method to limit a collision (till collided though). Didn't go for ball when Lingards shot was saved onto the post, seemed he was scared of a collision with the post. Quite funny actually.

WoollyRedHat

TheDoctor wrote: »

That North London battle for the Europa League spot is going to be interesting to follow the rest of the season

Oh dear, do try better.

Cantona's Collars

Rumple Stillson wrote: »

That was my joke!

I know, just added to it for effect.

Cantona's Collars

Mushy wrote: »

Not Bellerin's fault, but the method of the tackle was utterly bizarre. It seemed Bellerin was scared of any potential collision, he effectively ducked out of the way. Still a red card, but not intentional.

Oddly enough, looking at Bellerin through a few instances in that game, it looked like he was actively avoiding collisions. He did the same to Young too, odd tackle method to limit a collision (till collided though). Didn't go for ball when Lingards shot was saved onto the post, seemed he was scared of a collision with the post. Quite funny actually.

I was always told, either go into a tackle whole heartedly or not at all cos you'll get hurt yourself. Bellerin went in like he was scared and only half committed to the tackle and ended up on the wrong end of a boot full of studs. Not victim blaming but if he keeps doing that, he'll end up with a broken leg.
Even the pros analysing it were critical of his tackling style. They weren't trying to exonerate Pogba but said Bellerin put himself in a position that led to him being walked on.

theoneeyedman

I'm no fan of pogba, and certainly not a fan of United, but he was unlucky to see red IMHO. Bellerin cowered out and lay down/ sat down in front of him. To be fair to pogba, to try to avoid standing on Bellerin, would probably have ended in an ankle injury to himself. Ref called it as he saw it I suppose but it was Bellerin's own fault

Jayop

You know when that we'll known expression "a few seconds" is most frequently used? When something was a few ****ing seconds.

Seriously this wumming bull**** is both pathetic and tiresome.

Pogba was deserveably sent off. You can't go in with studs up like that.

Perhaps some karma after saying he hoped some city players get injured.

Jayop

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Pogba was deserveably sent off. You can't go in with studs up like that.

Perhaps some karma after saying he hoped some city players get injured.

Very very few saying he should have got the line. It was a red all day long.

monkey9

Jayop wrote: »

Sorry but that about Kos is pure rubbish. Had he been sent off you'd have had the ref on bt sports saying it was absolutely the correct decision. Lukaku was well ahead of bellerin and was clean through on goal. Stonewall red card.

You're wrong on this. It wasn't a clear goal scoring opportunity and therefore the yellow was the correct decision.

Quazzie

monkey9 wrote: »

You're wrong on this. It wasn't a clear goal scoring opportunity and therefore the yellow was the correct decision.

Plus Lukaku was actually being pushed slightly away from goal which of given Bellerin the time to get back.

monkey9

Quazzie wrote: »

Plus Lukaku was actually being pushed slightly away from goal which of given Bellerin the time to get back.

People seem focused on a last man rule that doesn't exist.

Jayop

He was one on one with the keeper. If that's not a clear goal scoring opportunity then the expression holds no meaning. It was a stonewall red.

Mars Bar

Jayop wrote: »

He was one on one with the keeper. If that's not a clear goal scoring opportunity then the expression holds no meaning. It was a stonewall red.

He wasn't one on one with the keeper!

Jayop

Mars Bar wrote: »

He wasn't one on one with the keeper!

Because he was dragged down.

greendom

Jayop wrote: »

Because he was dragged down.

And Bellerin would have got to him before he faced up to Cech

GavRedKing

Jayop wrote: »

He was one on one with the keeper. If that's not a clear goal scoring opportunity then the expression holds no meaning. It was a stonewall red.

I'd consider one on one with the GK to be a bit closer than 30 yards from the goal with one of the quickest players in the league coming around to cover.

Giggsy11

greendom wrote: »

And Bellerin would have got to him before he faced up to Cech

GavRedKing wrote: »

I'd consider one on one with the GK to be a bit closer than 30 yards from the goal with one of the quickest players in the league coming around to cover.

I don't think how quick a player is considered when making the decision. Chris foy explained it last week and said "Who are we to judge how quick the player is, so it's out of contention". I'm paraphrasing what he said.

greendom

Giggsy11 wrote: »

I don't think how quick a player is considered when making the decision. Chris foy explained it last week and said "Who are we to judge how quick the player is, so it's out of contention". I'm paraphrasing what he said.

So what is considered?

Giggsy11

greendom wrote: »

So what is considered?

Clear goal scoring opportunity, not whether the player behind the player is quicker than the player who is running with the ball.

Skylinehead

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Clear goal scoring opportunity, not whether the player behind the player is quicker than the player who is running with the ball.

But the speed of those players directly influences whether a situation is a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Giggsy11

Skylinehead wrote: »

But the speed of those players directly influences whether a situation is a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Well that's not my interpretation, it's how refs see it and that's what Chris Foy said, that refs are not there to judge who is faster player or something like that.

Loafing Oaf

They seem to adopt the narrowest reasonable definition of 'clear goal-scoring opportunity,' like there has to be a better than 50/50 chance of scoring or something.

GavRedKing

I dont think any situation when youre that far from goal should be considered a clear goal scoring situation.

If a GK comes out and forces a player away from the goal and takes him down, its a penalty and a yellow card for the GK even though by his actions hes potentially stopped a clear goal scoring chance. In the Lukaku incident, the yellow for Kos, for me, was 100% a correct call.

Trigger

GavRedKing wrote: »

I dont think any situation when youre that far from goal should be considered a clear goal scoring situation.

If a GK comes out and forces a player away from the goal and takes him down, its a penalty and a yellow card for the GK even though by his actions hes potentially stopped a clear goal scoring chance.In the Lukaku incident, the yellow for Kos, for me, was 100% a correct call.

If it’s one on one in this case, by the letter of the law it’s a red card if outside the box, inside the box it’s a Peno and Yellow card. The whole rule is centred around taking away double punishments.. Peno and red card. It’s the same situation if it’s the last defender

GavRedKing

astradave wrote: »

If it’s one on one in this case, by the letter of the law it’s a red card if outside the box, inside the box it’s a Peno and Yellow card. The whole rule is centred around taking away double punishments.. Peno and red card. It’s the same situation if it’s the last defender

I get that, I've been on the end of the peno and yellow card myself the other week. :pac:

But, the law is flawed, theres no way Kos should be sent off for being that far from goal for a coming together, he didnt even tackle Lukaku, they just tangled up.

Now, had he been on the edge of the box and he dragged him down or tackled him from behind, I'd be looking for a red all day.

For me the incident was too far away from the goal to warrant a red, had Kos knocked Lukaku over inside the semi circle of the half way line, there was no way it should be considered a red.

I know Arsenal had Mertesacker sent off against Chelsea 2 or 3years back as Costa turned him on the edge of the box, he was last man and was sent off but Costa was about 2 steps from the 18 yard box.

Nerdlingr

Kos should have seen red for the way he defended the third goal anyway. :P

Trigger

GavRedKing wrote: »

I get that, I've been on the end of the peno and yellow card myself the other week. :pac:

But, the law is flawed, theres no way Kos should be sent off for being that far from goal for a coming together, he didnt even tackle Lukaku, they just tangled up.

Now, had he been on the edge of the box and he dragged him down or tackled him from behind, I'd be looking for a red all day.

For me the incident was too far away from the goal to warrant a red, had Kos knocked Lukaku over inside the semi circle of the half way line, there was no way it should be considered a red.

I know Arsenal had Mertesacker sent off against Chelsea 2 or 3years back as Costa turned him on the edge of the box, he was last man and was sent off but Costa was about 2 steps from the 18 yard box.

What about if it was in the same position and Lukaku was 2 steps ahead of Kos with no Belleran and his heels were clipped? Would it still be too far away for it to warrant a red? I personally disagree with your reasoning using the distance as a back up.

My opinion on this is that it should have been a red card as he prevented Lukaku from getting through on goal. While Belleran was close he was still 3/4 steps ahead(behind?) of Kos when the tackle is made and an individual players speed should not be taken into account..

Now comes the tricky bit. While we can see from the side angle that Belleran is in that position he could look like he is a lot closer from the refs angle, so I don’t blame him for giving a yellow, though I do think he should have referred with his linesman.

Nerdlingr

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Kos should have seen red for the way he defended the third goal anyway. :P

I'd agree somewhat but that was also down to Pogbas power and strength

GavRedKing

astradave wrote: »

What about if it was in the same position and Lukaku was 2 steps ahead of Kos with no Belleran and his heels were clipped? Would it still be too far away for it to warrant a red? I personally disagree with your reasoning using the distance as a back up.

My opinion on this is that it should have been a red card as he prevented Lukaku from getting through on goal. While Belleran was close he was still 3/4 steps ahead(behind?) of Kos when the tackle is made and an individual players speed should not be taken into account..

Now comes the tricky bit. While we can see from the side angle that Belleran is in that position he could look like he is a lot closer from the refs angle, so I don’t blame him for giving a yellow, though I do think he should have referred with his linesman.

If Lukaku was closer I'd be more inclined to get the red out, no doubt about it but the distance from the goal should always be considered if its a one on one scenario.

There was an incident about 7 years ago too where Cahill playing for Bolton at the time, got turned out on the wide left very close to the half way line and he was sent off and at the time it made no sense to me TBH, it was never a clear goal scoring opportunity some 50 yards for goal.

Edit : Heres Owen Coyles take on it. http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/16019968

Nerdlingr

M!Ck^ wrote: »

I'd agree somewhat but that was also down to Pogbas power and strength

I thought it was awful defending myself. Especially from someone so experienced as Kos.
He didnt need to make a tackle, just shepherd pogba away from goal... where he was heading anyway. In trying to win the ball he gave pogba a way out, which he took full advantage of.

SlickRic

Its also not just 'clear' goalscoring opportunity, but 'clear and obvious'. The word 'obvious' is important.

The 'obvious' gives a lot more wiggle room for the referee to have to be pretty damn certain that the striker is likely to score in order to give a red card.

batistuta9

Man u strangely decide not to appeal pogbas accidental step on bellerin, who was actually in his way anyway

Jayop

SlickRic wrote: »

Its also not just 'clear' goalscoring opportunity, but 'clear and obvious'. The word 'obvious' is important.

The 'obvious' gives a lot more wiggle room for the referee to have to be pretty damn certain that the striker is likely to score in order to give a red card.

It doesn't have to be obvious that he was going to score it has to be obvious that he will have an opportunity to score which he obviously did.