|
Post by mrred on Feb 15, 2016 12:50:21 GMT
What an absolute prick. Went in to roll hoping for a foul, saw Atkinson wasn't going to blow the whistle and promptly got up. Fucking fanny.
I know Shaqiri did near enough the same thing and I don't condone that either.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 15, 2016 13:22:56 GMT
It wasn't even a foul. Drinkwater clearly won the ball and the impact on the ball bounced his leg into Ramsey's. Watching the game, I highlighted the rolling, mock agony and then the jump straight to his feet to harangue the ref to my little lad. Lo and behold, it was Aaron Ramsey. Ramsey is an absolute fanny and Arsenal are everything that is wrong with modern day football. I was gutted for Leicester yesterday but equally delighted for Spurs. ps...I also condemned the rolling around by Shaq on Saturday. We don't do that at Stoke and I hope someone has a word in his ear about it. Embarrassing. how many people over how many threads week after week have to tell you before you take it in????? WINNING THE BALL DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NOT A FOUL!!!!!!!jesus hates christ!!!!! he won the ball by going in with studs up at shin level, that would never have been a fair tackle in any fucking decade so drop this "modern day football" garbage. no question it was a foul!!! i think it's even q uestionable to say he won the ball..his right leg (studs up) barely galnces the bloody ball before slamming into Ramsey's leg and then his left clears the ball AFTER he's taken the player out
it's not even unclear or debatable and his leg being that high is sod all to do with momentum of anything, he STARTS his challenge with his foot that high before he even touches the ball!...ludicrous to say it's not a foul and i hope you never ref any bloody kids games if you think that's a fair bloody challenge. yes Ramsey's a prick we all know that but that doesn't automatically make every challenge against him fair, it was a shocking tackle that simple!
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Feb 15, 2016 13:33:56 GMT
Looking at that vid, it's reckless and dangerous.
Drinkwater is a little unlucky in that he misses the ball with his leading right foot. If he had made good contact with the ball it might not have looked so bad.
The other interesting thing is that Drinkwater is fully committed whereas Ramsey appears to draw out of the 50/50 challenge.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 13:36:46 GMT
It wasn't even a foul. Drinkwater clearly won the ball and the impact on the ball bounced his leg into Ramsey's. Watching the game, I highlighted the rolling, mock agony and then the jump straight to his feet to harangue the ref to my little lad. Lo and behold, it was Aaron Ramsey. Ramsey is an absolute fanny and Arsenal are everything that is wrong with modern day football. I was gutted for Leicester yesterday but equally delighted for Spurs. ps...I also condemned the rolling around by Shaq on Saturday. We don't do that at Stoke and I hope someone has a word in his ear about it. Embarrassing. how many people over how many threads week after week have to tell you before you take it in????? WINNING THE BALL DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NOT A FOUL!!!!!!!jesus hates christ!!!!! he won the ball by going in with studs up at shin level, that would never have been a fair tackle in any fucking decade so drop this "modern day football" garbage. no question it was a foul!!! i think it's even q uestionable to say he won the ball..his right leg (studs up) barely galnces the bloody ball before slamming into Ramsey's leg and then his left clears the ball AFTER he's taken the player out
it's not even unclear or debatable and his leg being that high is sod all to do with momentum of anything, he STARTS his challenge with his foot that high before he even touches the ball!...ludicrous to say it's not a foul and i hope you never ref any bloody kids games if you think that's a fair bloody challenge. yes Ramsey's a prick we all know that but that doesn't automatically make every challenge against him fair, it was a shocking tackle that simple!
Winning the ball does not mean it isn't a foul. I agree. I'm not fucking stupid. However, the initial tackle wasn't high nor was it studs up. He won the ball cleanly and his impact on the ball led to the raising of the leg and the contact with Ramsey. The challenge looks far worse than it actually was and it wasn't a foul. In Kids football, any slide tackle is a foul. As soon as the kids go to ground, you're instructed by league organisers to give a foul, regardless of whether it is or not. Now get down off that high fucking horse than you seem to like residing on or better still, throw a tantrum and disappear for a few months again!
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Feb 15, 2016 13:42:08 GMT
Sherwoods comment of "Vardy had every right to run into Monreal" was a belter as well. Utter plank. Hate this latest phrase every right. Does someone have the right to roll on the floor faking injury if a player catches him? Ryan. You should have used instagram to apologize. Ramsey accepted drinkwater on instagram. Silly Ryan. The "every right to......." Was coined by sheep-Shearer few seasons ago when referring to players falling over in the penalty area after being shot with an elephant gun minor collisions that are accidental or even non existent. It certainly is a minefield when it's condoned by pundits, managers and even some fans. We have to live with it I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 15, 2016 13:43:33 GMT
how many people over how many threads week after week have to tell you before you take it in????? WINNING THE BALL DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NOT A FOUL!!!!!!!jesus hates christ!!!!! he won the ball by going in with studs up at shin level, that would never have been a fair tackle in any fucking decade so drop this "modern day football" garbage. no question it was a foul!!! i think it's even q uestionable to say he won the ball..his right leg (studs up) barely galnces the bloody ball before slamming into Ramsey's leg and then his left clears the ball AFTER he's taken the player out
it's not even unclear or debatable and his leg being that high is sod all to do with momentum of anything, he STARTS his challenge with his foot that high before he even touches the ball!...ludicrous to say it's not a foul and i hope you never ref any bloody kids games if you think that's a fair bloody challenge. yes Ramsey's a prick we all know that but that doesn't automatically make every challenge against him fair, it was a shocking tackle that simple!
Winning the ball does not mean it isn't a foul. I agree. I'm not fucking stupid. However, the initial tackle wasn't high nor was it studs up. He won the ball cleanly and his impact on the ball led to the raising of the leg and the contact with Ramsey. The challenge looks far worse than it actually was and it wasn't a foul. In Kids football, any slide tackle is a foul. As soon as the kids go to ground, you're instructed by league organisers to give a foul, regardless of whether it is or not. Now get down off that high fucking horse than you seem to like residing on or better still, throw a tantrum and disappear for a few months again! ah the adult response eludes you yet again.... have you even seen that vid? if so it is very very clear that his foot was up at shin level BEFORE he even touched the bloody ball!!! when he DOES touch the ball his foot skims the very top of it (which is shin height). unfortunately for you, the camera certainly doesn't lie on this one, it's bloody clear as day!!!! if his foot is at ground level, tell me how exactly does it only make contact with the top of the ball rather than the bottom/middle of the ball??? try watching the bloody tackle before making such juvenile comments eh big man?
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 13:48:08 GMT
Says you. Who the fucking hell do you think you're talking to? You wouldn't take that tone face to face I'm sure. You need to read your original post again.
I don't need to see the video and can't see it on my phone anyway. I watched the game and saw the replays. He tackled side on and won the ball. The impact on the ball bounced his leg and he crashed into the Arsenal player. It looks far worse than it was from your still image above.
Regardless of whether it involved Ramsey or not, in my opinion, it wasn't a foul. The referee, who was yards away from the incident, didn't give a foul either.
The worst tackle in the game was Ramsey's on a Leicester player. I forget which one. Yet again, as it was an Arsenal player committing the foul, nothing is said. See also, Koschielny's (sp?) tackle.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Feb 15, 2016 14:02:43 GMT
Says you. Who the fucking hell do you think you're talking to? You wouldn't take that tone face to face I'm sure. You need to read your original post again. I don't need to see the video and can't see it on my phone anyway. I watched the game and saw the replays. He tackled side on and won the ball. The impact on the ball bounced his leg and he crashed into the Arsenal player. It looks far worse than it was from your still image above. Regardless of whether it involved Ramsey or not, in my opinion, it wasn't a foul. The referee, who was yards away from the incident, didn't give a foul either. The worst tackle in the game was Ramsey's on a Leicester player. I forget which one. Yet again, as it was an Arsenal player committing the foul, nothing is said. See also, Koschielny's (sp?) tackle. This is the first time I've seen that challenge - and there is no doubt it's a shocker. He's gone in high and fast (as mmlc says his foot comes of the top of the ball). It's a red card challenge for recklessness. Ramsay was lucky to walk away from it. Not seen the other challenge you mention so it's entirely possible it wasn't the worst in the game. But, it was a bad one by any standard.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 15, 2016 14:13:49 GMT
Says you. Who the fucking hell do you think you're talking to? You wouldn't take that tone face to face I'm sure. You need to read your original post again. I don't need to see the video and can't see it on my phone anyway. I watched the game and saw the replays. He tackled side on and won the ball. The impact on the ball bounced his leg and he crashed into the Arsenal player. It looks far worse than it was from your still image above. Regardless of whether it involved Ramsey or not, in my opinion, it wasn't a foul. The referee, who was yards away from the incident, didn't give a foul either. The worst tackle in the game was Ramsey's on a Leicester player. I forget which one. Yet again, as it was an Arsenal player committing the foul, nothing is said. See also, Koschielny's (sp?) tackle. you arrogant prick!!!! "Who the fuck do you think you're talking to?" after admitting that you haven't even watched the fucking video posted (it's not a still image, a slow motion replay of the tackle that PROVES your take on it is, well quite simply, staggeringly incorrect!!! and "You wouldn't take that tone face to face"????? grow the fuck up, are you going to offer me out at the Stan Matthews statue next? the video i've posted proves that what you've described is completely incorrect...i really don't care what your opinion is when it's based on something that just didn't even bloody happen the way you've described it! if you get something plain wrong then people will (and have the right) to call you out on that, particularly when you're getting that irate at those who have disagreed with you. pathetic all round really
|
|
|
Post by foster on Feb 15, 2016 14:20:59 GMT
Says you. Who the fucking hell do you think you're talking to? You wouldn't take that tone face to face I'm sure. You need to read your original post again. I don't need to see the video and can't see it on my phone anyway. I watched the game and saw the replays. He tackled side on and won the ball. The impact on the ball bounced his leg and he crashed into the Arsenal player. It looks far worse than it was from your still image above. Regardless of whether it involved Ramsey or not, in my opinion, it wasn't a foul. The referee, who was yards away from the incident, didn't give a foul either. The worst tackle in the game was Ramsey's on a Leicester player. I forget which one. Yet again, as it was an Arsenal player committing the foul, nothing is said. See also, Koschielny's (sp?) tackle. you arrogant prick!!!! "Who the fuck do you think you're talking to?" after admitting that you haven't even watched the fucking video posted (it's not a still image, a slow motion replay of the tackle that PROVES your take on it is, well quite simply, staggeringly incorrect!!! and "You wouldn't take that tone face to face"????? grow the fuck up, are you going to offer me out at the Stan Matthews statue next? the video i've posted proves that what you've described is completely incorrect...i really don't care what your opinion is when it's based on something that just didn't even bloody happen the way you've described it! if you get something plain wrong then people will (and have the right) to call you out on that, particularly when you're getting that irate at those who have disagreed with you. pathetic all round really Which one of you forgot about Valentines Day?
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 14:21:03 GMT
Says you. Who the fucking hell do you think you're talking to? You wouldn't take that tone face to face I'm sure. You need to read your original post again. I don't need to see the video and can't see it on my phone anyway. I watched the game and saw the replays. He tackled side on and won the ball. The impact on the ball bounced his leg and he crashed into the Arsenal player. It looks far worse than it was from your still image above. Regardless of whether it involved Ramsey or not, in my opinion, it wasn't a foul. The referee, who was yards away from the incident, didn't give a foul either. The worst tackle in the game was Ramsey's on a Leicester player. I forget which one. Yet again, as it was an Arsenal player committing the foul, nothing is said. See also, Koschielny's (sp?) tackle. you arrogant prick!!!! "Who the fuck do you think you're talking to?" after admitting that you haven't even watched the fucking video posted (it's not a still image, a slow motion replay of the tackle that PROVES your take on it is, well quite simply, staggeringly incorrect!!! and "You wouldn't take that tone face to face"????? grow the fuck up, are you going to offer me out at the Stan Matthews statue next? the video i've posted proves that what you've described is completely incorrect...i really don't care what your opinion is when it's based on something that just didn't even bloody happen the way you've described it! if you get something plain wrong then people will (and have the right) to call you out on that, particularly when you're getting that irate at those who have disagreed with you. pathetic all round really I'm not being funny but have you read the tone of your original post? How you can react to a bit thrown back in your direction is beyond me really? Am I going to offer you outside the statue? Why would I waste time with my pals pre or post match to meet with you? I haven't seen the video you've posted because I can't see them on my phone. I watched most of the game, saw the tackle and also saw the replays. My opinion, is that it looks far worse than it was because the impact on the ball bounced his leg into Ramsey's. Aren't I allowed an opinion? As I say, read back your original post to me and check again who is pathetic? EDIT - There is no getting irate from me. I posted once on the matter and hadn't got irate at anyone. The irate rant was yours. Mine was mere reaction to your stupid and unnecessarily aggressive ranted reply. It is no real surprise that you conveniently ignore your own failings in this discussion though. It isn't the first time and it probably won't be the last.
|
|
|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on Feb 15, 2016 14:21:49 GMT
Grow up the pair of you.....
The issue we do have to view is why was Drinkwater's apology so readily accepted without so much of a hoo-haa, yet Shawcross is vilified again and again? The tackle was a foul regardless of what is argued as was far far worse than Shawcross' (non)tackle..... Perhaps the fact that Arsenal are closing in the title race is a factor (rather than making excuses for another 'poor' season?)
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 15, 2016 14:28:41 GMT
you arrogant prick!!!! "Who the fuck do you think you're talking to?" after admitting that you haven't even watched the fucking video posted (it's not a still image, a slow motion replay of the tackle that PROVES your take on it is, well quite simply, staggeringly incorrect!!! and "You wouldn't take that tone face to face"????? grow the fuck up, are you going to offer me out at the Stan Matthews statue next? the video i've posted proves that what you've described is completely incorrect...i really don't care what your opinion is when it's based on something that just didn't even bloody happen the way you've described it! if you get something plain wrong then people will (and have the right) to call you out on that, particularly when you're getting that irate at those who have disagreed with you. pathetic all round really I'm not being funny but have you read the tone of your original post? How you can react to a bit thrown back in your direction is beyond me really? Am I going to offer you outside the statue? Why would I waste time with my pals pre or post match to meet with you? I haven't seen the video you've posted because I can't see them on my phone. I watched most of the game, saw the tackle and also saw the replays. My opinion, is that it looks far worse than it was because the impact on the ball bounced his leg into Ramsey's. Aren't I allowed an opinion? As I say, read back your original post to me and check again who is pathetic? EDIT - There is no getting irate from me. I posted once on the matter and hadn't got irate at anyone. The irate rant was yours. Mine was mere reaction to your stupid and unnecessarily aggressive ranted reply. It is no real surprise that you conveniently ignore your own failings in this discussion though. It isn't the first time and it probably won't be the last. of course you're entitled to an opinion....but when someone posts something to PROVE that your description of the incident is completely incorrect, do you not think it a tad OTT to then tell that person to "get off your fucking high horse" when you then go on to admit that you haven't even watched that evidence that proves you to be incorrect????? i'd say that IS pretty fucking arrogant! you said he didn't go studs up (the vid proves he did) and his foot wasn't high (the vid proves it was). you also said he won the ball cleanly (the vid shows he didn't even win the ball until AFTER he had smashed into Ramsey, the first touch only even skims the very top of the ball but certainly doesn't "win the ball"). i suggest you actually watch it at some point before telling people what they should or shouldn't do simply because they've posted proof that clearly shows you're incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 14:29:07 GMT
Just in case you can't see your staggering arrogance and double standards, here's your original response to my perfectly civil response that in my opinion it wasn't even a foul.
how many people over how many threads week after week have to tell you before you take it in?????
WINNING THE BALL DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NOT A FOUL!!!!!!!
jesus hates christ!!!!!
he won the ball by going in with studs up at shin level, that would never have been a fair tackle in any fucking decade so drop this "modern day football" garbage. no question it was a foul!!!
i think it's even questionable to say he won the ball..his right leg (studs up) barely galnces the bloody ball before slamming into Ramsey's leg and then his left clears the ball AFTER he's taken the player out
it's not even unclear or debatable and his leg being that high is sod all to do with momentum of anything, he STARTS his challenge with his foot that high before he even touches the ball!...ludicrous to say it's not a foul and i hope you never ref any bloody kids games if you think that's a fair bloody challenge. yes Ramsey's a prick we all know that but that doesn't automatically make every challenge against him fair, it was a shocking tackle that simple!
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 15, 2016 14:32:31 GMT
Just in case you can't see your staggering arrogance and double standards, here's your original response to my perfectly civil response that in my opinion it wasn't even a foul. how many people over how many threads week after week have to tell you before you take it in????? WINNING THE BALL DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NOT A FOUL!!!!!!! jesus hates christ!!!!! he won the ball by going in with studs up at shin level, that would never have been a fair tackle in any fucking decade so drop this "modern day football" garbage. no question it was a foul!!! i think it's even questionable to say he won the ball..his right leg (studs up) barely galnces the bloody ball before slamming into Ramsey's leg and then his left clears the ball AFTER he's taken the player out it's not even unclear or debatable and his leg being that high is sod all to do with momentum of anything, he STARTS his challenge with his foot that high before he even touches the ball!...ludicrous to say it's not a foul and i hope you never ref any bloody kids games if you think that's a fair bloody challenge. yes Ramsey's a prick we all know that but that doesn't automatically make every challenge against him fair, it was a shocking tackle that simple! and???? wasn't one of the first things you used to defend the challenge the fact that he clearly won the ball (something you've said time and time again and people have pointed out time and time again that winning the ball is iirelevant but still you bang on about it)???? if you know that's fuck all to do with whether or not it's a foul then why say it? secondly, if you do think that's a fair challenge then yes, i do hope you never ref any kids games. it wasn't only a foul it was a shocking challenge that could very easily break someone's leg. don't really see the point of that post from you there to be honest
|
|
|
Post by foster on Feb 15, 2016 14:32:36 GMT
Grow up the pair of you..... The issue we do have to view is why was Drinkwater's apology so readily accepted without so much of a hoo-haa, yet Shawcross is vilified again and again? The tackle was a foul regardless of what is argued as was far far worse than Shawcross' (non)tackle..... Perhaps the fact that Arsenal are closing in the title race is a factor (rather than making excuses for another 'poor' season?) WHo do you think YOU are talking to???? This is Lord MickMills and Emperor DaveJohnno you're speaking to. Show some damn respect!!
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 14:33:08 GMT
I'm not being funny but have you read the tone of your original post? How you can react to a bit thrown back in your direction is beyond me really? Am I going to offer you outside the statue? Why would I waste time with my pals pre or post match to meet with you? I haven't seen the video you've posted because I can't see them on my phone. I watched most of the game, saw the tackle and also saw the replays. My opinion, is that it looks far worse than it was because the impact on the ball bounced his leg into Ramsey's. Aren't I allowed an opinion? As I say, read back your original post to me and check again who is pathetic? EDIT - There is no getting irate from me. I posted once on the matter and hadn't got irate at anyone. The irate rant was yours. Mine was mere reaction to your stupid and unnecessarily aggressive ranted reply. It is no real surprise that you conveniently ignore your own failings in this discussion though. It isn't the first time and it probably won't be the last. of course you're entitled to an opinion....but when someone posts something to PROVE that your description of the incident is completely incorrect, do you not think it a tad OTT to then tell that person to "get off your fucking high horse" when you then go on to admit that you haven't even watched that evidence that proves you to be incorrect????? i'd say that IS pretty fucking arrogant! you said he didn't go studs up (the vid proves he did) and his foot wasn't high (the vid proves it was). you also said he won the ball cleanly (the vid shows he didn't even win the ball until AFTER he had smashed into Ramsey, the first touch only even skims the very top of the ball but certainly doesn't "win the ball"). i suggest you actually watch it at some point before telling people what they should or shouldn't do simply because they've posted proof that clearly shows you're incorrect. So you produce a video that you say shows I'm wrong with my view of what I saw? Why not post that without all the original vitriol with comments along the lines of "I have to disagree davejohnno1. He may well have touched the ball but this coverage shows clearly that it was a foul and a bad tackle. He didn't make contact with the ball until after he made contact with Ramsey". I have no problem with whatever your view of events may be and I have no problem if you're video proves me to be wrong. Even if it proves no such thing, I have no problem with that either, just like I have no problem with differing views. What I object to is the fact that you start trying to say I'm disrespectful or arrogant whilst completely ignoring the arrogant, dictatorial and unnecessarily aggressive nature of your own response. As I said in my response back to you, were we discussing it face to face I don't think you would take the same tone. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 14:34:38 GMT
Just in case you can't see your staggering arrogance and double standards, here's your original response to my perfectly civil response that in my opinion it wasn't even a foul. how many people over how many threads week after week have to tell you before you take it in????? WINNING THE BALL DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NOT A FOUL!!!!!!! jesus hates christ!!!!! he won the ball by going in with studs up at shin level, that would never have been a fair tackle in any fucking decade so drop this "modern day football" garbage. no question it was a foul!!! i think it's even questionable to say he won the ball..his right leg (studs up) barely galnces the bloody ball before slamming into Ramsey's leg and then his left clears the ball AFTER he's taken the player out it's not even unclear or debatable and his leg being that high is sod all to do with momentum of anything, he STARTS his challenge with his foot that high before he even touches the ball!...ludicrous to say it's not a foul and i hope you never ref any bloody kids games if you think that's a fair bloody challenge. yes Ramsey's a prick we all know that but that doesn't automatically make every challenge against him fair, it was a shocking tackle that simple! and???? wasn't one of the first things you used to defend the challenge the fact that he clearly won the ball (something you've said time and time again and people have pointed out time and time again that winning the ball is iirelevant but still you bang on about it)???? if you know that's fuck all to do with whether or not it's a foul then why say it? secondly, if you do think that's a fair challenge then yes, i do hope you never ref any kids games. it wasn't only a foul it was a shocking challenge that could very easily break someone's leg. don't really see the point of that post from you there to be honest You're mixing me up with someone else I'm afraid. No one has ever had to tell me that getting the ball doesn't mean it isn't a foul. It's just like me shouting to you "how many times do we have to fucking tell you that just because there was contact doesn't mean it was a foul" having never once had such a conversation with you before. EDIT - I said he got the ball because it is pertinent to my view of the tackle. His impact on the ball bounced his leg into Ramsey's making it look a far worse tackle than it actually was. EDIT 2 - I referee plenty of kids games and did so on Saturday. It was a brilliant game of football at U8 level and the referee was commended about how much fun he'd made it for the kids.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Feb 15, 2016 14:40:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 14:51:28 GMT
I'm not being funny but have you read the tone of your original post? How you can react to a bit thrown back in your direction is beyond me really? Am I going to offer you outside the statue? Why would I waste time with my pals pre or post match to meet with you? I haven't seen the video you've posted because I can't see them on my phone. I watched most of the game, saw the tackle and also saw the replays. My opinion, is that it looks far worse than it was because the impact on the ball bounced his leg into Ramsey's. Aren't I allowed an opinion? As I say, read back your original post to me and check again who is pathetic? EDIT - There is no getting irate from me. I posted once on the matter and hadn't got irate at anyone. The irate rant was yours. Mine was mere reaction to your stupid and unnecessarily aggressive ranted reply. It is no real surprise that you conveniently ignore your own failings in this discussion though. It isn't the first time and it probably won't be the last. of course you're entitled to an opinion....but when someone posts something to PROVE that your description of the incident is completely incorrect, do you not think it a tad OTT to then tell that person to "get off your fucking high horse" when you then go on to admit that you haven't even watched that evidence that proves you to be incorrect????? i'd say that IS pretty fucking arrogant! you said he didn't go studs up (the vid proves he did) and his foot wasn't high (the vid proves it was). you also said he won the ball cleanly (the vid shows he didn't even win the ball until AFTER he had smashed into Ramsey, the first touch only even skims the very top of the ball but certainly doesn't "win the ball"). i suggest you actually watch it at some point before telling people what they should or shouldn't do simply because they've posted proof that clearly shows you're incorrect. Ha, Ha. I couldn't help myself so have had to stop at the services so as to log on via my laptop to see the video you've posted which is from a completely different angle that it was shown on SKY TV. However, I maintain it still looks far worse than it was. Drinkwater is focused solely on the ball, he's gone in low initially and actually played at the ball a fraction earlier, missing it at the point he probably intended to make contact (like a miskick in someways), caught the high side of the ball and bounced into Ramsey. From that view, you could argue that it was a foul courtesy of the "out of control" argument. Afterall, he hasn't made contact with the ball at the point he intended to. However, he did make contact with the ball and it was that contact that led to the high contact with Ramsey. To say he only made contact with the ball after he made contact with Ramsey is patently wrong though. The first contact is with the ball, then with Ramsey and then there is a second contact with the ball via his trailing leg. Had he made no initial contact with the ball, it is debateable if he'd have made contact with Ramsey. Equally, it is a very fair comment, though not one that I made (even though you both say and insinuate that I did) to say that it is only a foul in the modern game where the rules for such challenges vary dramatically from era's long since passed.
|
|
|
Post by scfcno1fan on Feb 15, 2016 14:54:14 GMT
That tackle and the Shawcross tackle are not even comparable.
That is 10 x worse. Terrible tackle.
I doubt Ramsey would have accepted his apology so readily of damage had actually been done.
|
|
|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on Feb 15, 2016 14:55:48 GMT
Grow up the pair of you..... The issue we do have to view is why was Drinkwater's apology so readily accepted without so much of a hoo-haa, yet Shawcross is vilified again and again? The tackle was a foul regardless of what is argued as was far far worse than Shawcross' (non)tackle..... Perhaps the fact that Arsenal are closing in the title race is a factor (rather than making excuses for another 'poor' season?) WHo do you think YOU are talking to???? This is Lord MickMills and Emperor DaveJohnno you're speaking to. Show some damn respect!! I think they should bow down to me!! I was here since the fenetre/rivals period long before these young upstarts Sorry, It must be a German thing.. coming over.. trying to take over
|
|
|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on Feb 15, 2016 14:57:50 GMT
That tackle and the Shawcross tackle are not even comparable. That is 10 x worse. Terrible tackle. I doubt Ramsey would have accepted his apology so readily of damage had actually been done. I also think it wouldn't have been so readily accepted had Arsenal not won!...... Not that I am one for casting a dispersion on such a great club
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 14:58:13 GMT
That tackle and the Shawcross tackle are not even comparable. That is 10 x worse. Terrible tackle. I doubt Ramsey would have accepted his apology so readily of damage had actually been done. Actually the tackles were remarkably similar but for the fact that Drinkwater got the ball first whereas Shawcross made no contact with the ball at all as I remember.
|
|
|
Post by stayingupfor GermanStokie on Feb 15, 2016 15:07:19 GMT
That tackle and the Shawcross tackle are not even comparable. That is 10 x worse. Terrible tackle. I doubt Ramsey would have accepted his apology so readily of damage had actually been done. Actually the tackles were remarkably similar but for the fact that Drinkwater got the ball first whereas Shawcross made no contact with the ball at all as I remember. I'm not sure, I thought Shawcross went to 'clear the ball' with a swinging foot rather than the slide tackle that Drinkwater produced.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 15, 2016 15:11:06 GMT
of course you're entitled to an opinion....but when someone posts something to PROVE that your description of the incident is completely incorrect, do you not think it a tad OTT to then tell that person to "get off your fucking high horse" when you then go on to admit that you haven't even watched that evidence that proves you to be incorrect????? i'd say that IS pretty fucking arrogant! you said he didn't go studs up (the vid proves he did) and his foot wasn't high (the vid proves it was). you also said he won the ball cleanly (the vid shows he didn't even win the ball until AFTER he had smashed into Ramsey, the first touch only even skims the very top of the ball but certainly doesn't "win the ball"). i suggest you actually watch it at some point before telling people what they should or shouldn't do simply because they've posted proof that clearly shows you're incorrect. Ha, Ha. I couldn't help myself so have had to stop at the services so as to log on via my laptop to see the video you've posted which is from a completely different angle that it was shown on SKY TV. However, I maintain it still looks far worse than it was. Drinkwater is focused solely on the ball, he's gone in low initially and actually played at the ball a fraction earlier, missing it at the point he probably intended to make contact (like a miskick in someways), caught the high side of the ball and bounced into Ramsey. From that view, you could argue that it was a foul courtesy of the "out of control" argument. Afterall, he hasn't made contact with the ball at the point he intended to. However, he did make contact with the ball and it was that contact that led to the high contact with Ramsey. To say he only made contact with the ball after he made contact with Ramsey is patently wrong though. The first contact is with the ball, then with Ramsey and then there is a second contact with the ball via his trailing leg. Had he made no initial contact with the ball, it is debateable if he'd have made contact with Ramsey. Equally, it is a very fair comment, though not one that I made (even though you both say and insinuate that I did) to say that it is only a foul in the modern game where the rules for such challenges vary dramatically from era's long since passed. i never said he didn't make contact with the ball until after he made contact with Ramsay...i said he didn't win/clear the ball until using his left leg which was after the contact with Ramsey. skimming the top of the ball (which is all he did with his right leg) in no way means he "won" the ball there at all! this momentum thing is ludicrous as well, if you remove the ball from that vid then his foot is STILL going into Ramsey's shin. this bounce off the ball doesn't change the direction of where his foot is going and doesn't substantialy change the height his foot is either, the only difference it would have made would have been him hitting Ramsey's shin about 1 or 2 inches lower than he actually did. if you go in studs up (which he did, no bounce off the ball changed that at all) at shin height (which, again you can clearly see before he touches the ball he is) then it's a foul and a pretty terrible tackle all round.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 15, 2016 15:14:55 GMT
Ha, Ha. I couldn't help myself so have had to stop at the services so as to log on via my laptop to see the video you've posted which is from a completely different angle that it was shown on SKY TV. However, I maintain it still looks far worse than it was. Drinkwater is focused solely on the ball, he's gone in low initially and actually played at the ball a fraction earlier, missing it at the point he probably intended to make contact (like a miskick in someways), caught the high side of the ball and bounced into Ramsey. From that view, you could argue that it was a foul courtesy of the "out of control" argument. Afterall, he hasn't made contact with the ball at the point he intended to. However, he did make contact with the ball and it was that contact that led to the high contact with Ramsey. To say he only made contact with the ball after he made contact with Ramsey is patently wrong though. The first contact is with the ball, then with Ramsey and then there is a second contact with the ball via his trailing leg. Had he made no initial contact with the ball, it is debateable if he'd have made contact with Ramsey. Equally, it is a very fair comment, though not one that I made (even though you both say and insinuate that I did) to say that it is only a foul in the modern game where the rules for such challenges vary dramatically from era's long since passed. i never said he didn't make contact with the ball until after he made contact with Ramsay...i said he didn't win/clear the ball until using his left leg which was after the contact with Ramsey. skimming the top of the ball (which is all he did with his right leg) in no way means he "won" the ball there at all! this momentum thing is ludicrous as well, if you remove the ball from that vid then his foot is STILL going into Ramsey's shin. this bounce off the ball doesn't change the direction of where his foot is going and doesn't substantialy change the height his foot is either, the only difference it would have made would have been him hitting Ramsey's shin about 1 or 2 inches lower than he actually did. if you go in studs up (which he did, no bounce off the ball changed that at all) at shin height (which, again you can clearly see before he touches the ball he is) then it's a foul and a pretty terrible tackle all round. Isn't that how you should have responded in the first place???? That way, we can agree to differ without the handbags from 100 miles away.
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Feb 15, 2016 15:42:27 GMT
Why would MMLC offer a civilised alternative argument when he can have a full on patronising, holier than thou rant? Especially if he can throw in a bit of CAPITAL LETTERS, profanities and end a sentence with eh?
It's annoying but just the way he rolls.
|
|
|
Post by scfcno1fan on Feb 15, 2016 15:55:10 GMT
That tackle and the Shawcross tackle are not even comparable. That is 10 x worse. Terrible tackle. I doubt Ramsey would have accepted his apology so readily of damage had actually been done. Actually the tackles were remarkably similar but for the fact that Drinkwater got the ball first whereas Shawcross made no contact with the ball at all as I remember. Yeah I thought it was more of a swinging leg from Shawcross. Also, I thought it was much further down the leg. Given Ramsey's already precarious position of his foot being planted in the turf, any contact would have resulted in the leg break.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2016 15:58:34 GMT
The only reason people like Sherwood appear as pundits is because they have fuck all else to occupy their lives. He is just a bitter,twisted failure. Not even worth listening to.
|
|