Newcastle United Message Board
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 10, 2011 02:47 Flag
I understand where you are coming from. Tackles like the one on Diaby, as happened to ben Arfa, do some times result in injury. My point is if the ball is not under 'complete control of the player in possesion' then tackles like that are acceptable. It's a risk I know, but the ball is there to be won and it's all part and parcel of the game. Viscious over the top studs shown tackles are not part and parcel of the game. And you can bring in a '70 mph' type rule, but it will be down to the ref in the end how he interprets that rule. Football is a passionate, tribal, game. Refs are open to this passion too............they will see certain things their way and other refs will see it a different way, as we do. That's what I like about this game, passion, emotion....... sometimes raw, at times violent. But without these things it wouldn't be the game we love.
Now really it's down to how football develops over the next few years. I've seen a lot of changes over the years. Not all for the good. It would be interesting to find out what the statistics are about tackles like that, how many made through out the season and what percentage result in serious injury. Anyway we've been 'round and round' on this one. It would be good if Arsenal could find a balance between the 1-0 to the Arsenal days...................resolute defending and play, and the kind of exciting football that Arsenal can serve up now. If you can find that balance I doubt very much whether you would lose a 4 goal lead like you did against us.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 9, 2011 21:18 Flag
<<That's where I disagree. It seems that you (and most other people) think that if the tackler has a good chance of winning the ball, then it's not a red. And further, if he actually gets the ball, then it's a good challenge.>>
Okay we agree to disagree on that one.
<<I think that's normally case, but if you've *also* got a reasonable chance of breaking the player's leg,>>
You could say that about any tackle........there's always a chance of injury through tackling. Fair enough over the top tackles...............tackling from behind, taking the players legs a away. Tackles where the tackler has no chance of winning the ball...............a straight red.
<<Ben Arfa didn't have the ball at his feet, so it was there to be won; De Jong had a good chance of winning the ball; De Jong actually won the ball. And yet he broke Ben Arfa's leg and it wasn't some freak accident>>
It was bad luck, that doesn't mean to say I thought Diaby 'got lucky'. Years ago players like George Best, Bobby Charlton and your own Charlie George could 'ride tackles' like that.
<<In terms of "reasonable measures", the first thing I would like to see is video evidence being used after a game for lengthy bans, even if the player gets a yellow card. At the moment, if you get a yellow at the time, then it's been dealt with and you can't get a ban.>>
If that's the case then it should be used to rescind red/yellow cards that maybe shouldn't have been given. And surprisingly enough I don't agree with it, as it takes away the authority of the match officials. And as I've read on here Phil Dowd has a bit of a reputation with Arsenal fans about being biased against Arsenal. Who is to say that those judging video evidence won't be biased for or against Arsenal or any other team. It's all about opinions mate. And if you got what you wanted than boards like these would be redundant. Playing contact sports is a risk, life is a risk. And I wouldn't have it any other way.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 9, 2011 20:36 Flag
<<If it is a contact sport like you claim then why the penalties?>>
Yes it's a contact sport, however using 'contact', no matter how slight, as a means of getting an unfair advantage is a foul......well at least the ref thought so.
<<Is cheat not what Newcastle players did the whole afternoon?>>
You obviously don't like it when someone plays you at your own game.
Looks like you're just more than pissed off that the mighty Arsenal lost a 4 goal lead to a team you probably consider made up of lesser mortals. I mean how dare they.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 9, 2011 02:49 Flag
Now for me the winning of the ball, in what I would call a 'meaty tackle' is fair. From what I've seen and I've mentioned on here, Diaby didn't have the ball 'at feet'. It looked to be running away from him. Now if he'd had the ball 'at feet', that is in control, and Barton had no chance of winning the ball then it's a foul. However the ball was 'not at Diaby's feet' he wasn't in control. The tackle was hard, but the ball was there to be won. Now if Barton had've went over the top, foul and a sending off. He didn't he timed his tackle and won the ball. Now obviously this was emotive stuff for Diaby, Arsenal and their fans..........considering what happened to Diaby last time he was tackled like that.
You say introduce 'reasonable measures' . What kind of measures would you like see to be introduced?
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 8, 2011 10:06 Flag
<<It's a red if it's a sufficiently dangerous tackle>>
And it's up to the ref to determine that on the spot. It's a contact game, and in all contact sports there are going to be injuries. Thats the way it is.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 8, 2011 03:36 Flag
Aye Bartons reputation does precede him a bit. Sometimes, and you won't probably agree with this, it goes against him which I think is a bit unfair. He seems to be singled out at times, for even the smallest of things, by the ref, press and opposition fans. Since we got relegated he seems to have taken on a new approach to life, away from football and he seems the better player for it. I think that's the first 'questionable' decision that has gone his way.
Newcastle's Hatem ben Arfa suffered a broken leg in a similar incident at Man City from a tackle from De Jong. Tackling and making hard but fair tackles is always hard to judge. They always look bad if the player who is tackled has his legs taken from beneath him.........but at the end of the day it's up to the ref to judge the difference between foul play and a mistimed tackle. I wouldn't want to see that aspect of the game done away with, tackling that is. It's a contact sport, played at a faster pace than it ever was played at. Thankfully the tackle didn't end in his leg been broken. So Arsenal can pick themselves up and hopefully make a decent fist of catching Manchester United.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 8, 2011 01:35 Flag
Ref's make bad calls in every game it's only when they go against the so called big 4 that they seem to be 'big news'. You can blame who ever you like at the end of the day a team of Arsenals calibre, should not lose a 4 goal lead. Now I work in the Gulf of Mexico. When I saw you were 2 up after 3 minutes I feared the worst. Half time well as far as I was concerned it was just a matter of how many you would score. When my boss phoned me and told me it was 4-4 I thought he was taking the piss. maybe the influence of whinging Wenger is having a bad effect on your team. Because an Arsenal team with the likes of Tony Adams and Martin Keown in would not have lost that game. And Graham Polls view is just like any others when he's not involved at the 'front line'......................easy to make.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 7, 2011 21:43 Flag
I'm sure if there was some kind of betting scam going on, then they wouldn't have made it so obvious. Maybe come back from 1/2-0 down but four.
As far as the penalty goes. These things happen. The ref obviously thought it was, and luckily for us he did. I just wonder if the disallowing of Bests 'off/onside' goal affected his decision, making right a wrong. At the end of the day Arsenal should not have thrown away a 4 goal lead under any circumstances. there can be no excuse for that. You have a fantastic team. However you have to ask the question why really did they lose that lead, against what was a demoralised team before kick off.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 7, 2011 21:35 Flag
Good point. However it's hard to tell, and prove, whether there is any 'intent' to hurt a player in such a tackle. It looked to me that Barton has won the ball, and that clip didn't show him winning the ball, just the contact afterward. And it seems to me that the ball was 'running away' from Diaby. The ball wasn't at 'feet' close control I think it's called. Now if Barton had made such a tackle under those circumstances then I think you'd have a fair point.
I don't think any player 'intends' to hurt another player in such a tackle. Apart from Roy Keane in his assault on that Man City player.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Feb 7, 2011 20:54 Flag
Of course they don't see it. Don't you know that they all went to the Arsene Whinger blind school. Barton played the ball. What do this lot expect ehhh, it's mans game or at least it used to be. Not a game for puffs.......................southern ones. At the end of the day the nancy boys took a well deserved 4-0 lead, against a team that was totally demoralised before the game kicked off, and blew the fucker. All it took was one meaty tackle, they hoisted up their petty coats squealed and dissappeared. Their next game............ah yes Wolves. I'm sure Mick McCarthy will have made some notes about how the Arsenal lady-boys capitulated when faced by a team of proper footballers.
The Pimp, the Prostitute and the Punter, pure fantasy............
The prostitute had the the punter over a 'barrel', a new punter was showing interest. The prostitute wanted more money for their services from the punter, after agreeing a new deal not too long ago. The other punter was prepared to pay more for the prostitutes services. They had the backing of a very wealthy pimp.
The old pimp got his cash..............a big lump sum. The wealthy pimp got his new prostitute and the other punter got the services of that prostitute. The prostitute and the old pimp blame each other, but it's the 'former' punter who is suffering.
Love, apart from the love the former punter had for the prostitute, never did enter the equation..........sadly the prostitutes love of money meant more than the love of the former punter.[/
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Nov 28, 2010 08:53 Flag
Click on message board settings at the top of the page on the right hand side. The when that page comes up on the left hand side of the page click on Ignore settings. That should do it.
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Nov 12, 2010 03:13 Flag
Martin is just another example of why women should not copulate with chimps. No matter how desperate they are, the chimp that is. Next time I hope his ma picks one with a brain cell.
- Steveshepnewc by Steveshepnewc May 10, 2010 18:32 Flag
- Steveshepnewc Steveshepnewc Mar 16, 2010 12:41 Flag
As I've said he's a mercenary little #$%$, and is more suited to your lot than ours. When Newcastle bought him, they knew he was injury prone, took a gamble and it didn't pay off. I wonder who would have signed him if he hadn't signed for your lot? Nobody seemed to be prepared to risk the the gamble. However you've got him, he's out for the rest of the season again. Just hope and pray that Rooney stays fit ehhh.
Why would I want to google anything about my experiences abroad? If you choose not to believe me then fair enough. At the risk of repeating myself, those truthful, honest posters on these boards would see no reason to doubt me. As an honest person I see no reason to doubt your claim that you live in Australia. Am I expecting too much of you to understand that. It must be extremely difficult for some one such as yourself, someone who's skull is as empty as a eunuchs scrotum, to realise and understand the concept of truth. PMSL