Hanshithispantz

No reason at all to think we wont be able to score past Sunderland like

We will get off with it on appeal, like Cronky has said, there reacting to the media over-reaction. And it was one fucking massive over-reaction like.

I read an Arsenal fan saying they could have had 3 penalties. One for Gervinho being fouled, one for Barton dragging him up and one for Taylor trying to con the ref by saying Gervinho elbowed Barton. Arsenal fans genuinly are the most clueless fuckers on the planet like, remember one of there blog editors claiming Phil Dowd had arguably the worst refereeing performance in Premier league history during the 4-4 comeback.

They can deny whatever they want FA arnt going to back down on the fact it's Barton/NUFC. fyp. The FA do not hate NUFC man ffs

Arsenal players got quite heated with the officials. I didn't notice anything out of the ordinary to be fair, just the natural response any group of players show when a player is sent off. The officials took control pretty quickly and the game kicked off again with a couple of minutes. Mental fine tbh.

Tbf I doubt the FA are charging both sides just to get a Barton, he gets a raw deal bt I doubt it goes THAT far. I'm guessing the just trying to set an example from the start of the season. It's bollocks like as absolutely nothing happened.

Eh? Other than Barton grabbing Gervinho nothing else happened Players from both side helped diffuse the situation if anything.

Theres also the fact that Taylor is probably capable of grabbing half a dozen goals from set pieces if he's lucky. I do like Williamson like, but I do think his performance on Saturday, along with his end of season form (even excluding the goals) should keep him alongside Coloccini.

Aye, because Keys is known for his famous banter amongst workmates. I think he was onabout Louise Taylor like

Saylor had a better game than Colo imo

tiotes was avtually from the side and going away from the player. huge difference His trailing leg went through the guys ankle iirc

you tend not to be allowed to follow through in such a manner though. Nothing wrong with the placement of his left leg in that challenge, if his foot went over the ball then the whole "studs up" argument would hold some water.

This.

I find it highly ammusing that you genuinly believe every legitimate tackle in the premier league is made with the players toes connecting with the ball like. Your allowed to take the ball with your studs, there isn't a law that says otherwise.

What is he meant to make contact with the ball with like? His laces

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/07/21/article-0-0B758605000005DC-196_634x424.jpg Do you see how his studs are facing outwards towards the player. That's called going into a tackle studs up. Take your own advise because you're embarrasing yourself. Settle down man buttercup. If you class that tackle as "studs up" then you are an idiot, i'm sorry, but 99% of tackles we see every weekend are "studs up" going by your logic. The tacke was bad because his trailing leg was completely out of position, had his trailing leg been on the floor it would have been a class challenge. quit the jibba jabba you two. cut to the chase, studs up or not was de jongs tackle meant to damage ? I couldn't possibly say if he meant to do damage or not, he was sprinting to win the ball and his challenge was hard because of this. I don't realy like De Jong, but had Ben Arfa not broke his leg I doubt many people would have been unhappy with a yellow card in that situation.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/07/21/article-0-0B758605000005DC-196_634x424.jpg Do you see how his studs are facing outwards towards the player. That's called going into a tackle studs up. Take your own advise because you're embarrasing yourself. Settle down man buttercup. If you class that tackle as "studs up" then you are an idiot, i'm sorry, but 99% of tackles we see every weekend are "studs up" going by your logic. The tacke was bad because his trailing leg was completely out of position, had his trailing leg been on the floor it would have been a class challenge.

Studs up? Fucking hell man go to bed.

I appologise for pulling you up about the facts like It was a bad tackle, but it was unlucky Ben Arfa's leg was broke, his foot was planted on the turn. It definatly wasn't a clear cut straight red card, it was debateable.

What you talking about, he won the ball man

The tackle was nasty like, his trailing leg was at knee height. However it was overplayed due to the fact Benny broke his leg. Yellow card tackle imo.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did. If a challenge isn't enough to actualy impede you then it's not a foul, so diving to the floor after slight contact is conning the ref into thinking you have been impeded. Striking a player in the face, regardless of how hard, is a sending off offence. obviously the player thought he was impeded enough to not go through on goal so made the most of it....as did joey. also i'm sat here watching it over and over and it's looking more like a penalty everytime i watch it. That may be the case, imo though it looked like the contact was next to nothing.

Come on man, if the contact isn't suficient enough to impede you then it isn't a foul. There isn't such thing as a "fair dive", but there is a huge differance betwean exagerating a situation and just plain diving to the ground to bring to referee into making the wrong decision. If a player is actualy triped and theatrically hurls his arms about and roles about the floor like he's been shot, that could be deemed as "helping the referee make the right decision". Imo Gervinho would not have been impeded/floored had he not purposefully thrown himself to the ground.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did. If a challenge isn't enough to actualy impede you then it's not a foul, so diving to the floor after slight contact is conning the ref into thinking you have been impeded. Basically, as far as i'm aware (and I may be wrong here), football is a contact sport.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did. If a challenge isn't enough to actualy impede you then it's not a foul, so diving to the floor after slight contact is conning the ref into thinking you have been impeded. Striking a player in the face, regardless of how hard, is a sending off offence.