[Albion] MOTD

[jamie (not that one)]

I'd say the first month or so of the new season will be flooded with pens for holding through VAR. Can't wait for all that nonsense to stop.

 

[Nixonator]

One of the most infuriating things about Sky's coverage yesterday was the amount of times the useless Redknapp and Arsenal ex-employee Scott declared with absolute certainty that it was a clear penalty and Monreal had clearly played the ball.
At half time they claimed to have watched the incident over and over, more than 30 times in fact, and it was a clear penalty.
They continued to repeat the same thing after the final whistle.

Just ONE look at the video in your post ... JUST ONE ... and it is as clear as day that AJ is the one playing the ball and there is virtually no contact with Monreal at all.
It begs the question what were those two clowns actually viewing?

Let's be honest, the collective brain power and footballing insight in that studio was as low as I've ever witnessed on sky.

I get frustrated sometimes but that was just laughable. They couldn't piece together a coherent point of view between them.

You might hope that they'll be embarassed as the only 'pundits' who thought it was a penalty, doubtful though.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I'd say the first month or so of the new season will be flooded with pens for holding through VAR. Can't wait for all that nonsense to stop.

Good point. I'd say you really don't want to be involved in the first game of the season (presumably there will be a Friday night or Saturday lunch game in Week 1) so that you can at least give your players some instructions based on how strict the VAR was in that. If not you're guessing. As I said in my reply to Guy Fawkes, holding and blocking goes on at every single corner. It'll take a brave manager and player not to do it.

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

I've said it once, I'll say it again, ours wasn't a pen, there's wasn't a pen, honours evened.

Of course ours was, accidental or delibrate makes no difference. It was still a foul. If he hadn't clipped him he wouldn't have fallen over.

 

[Lurker]

I will offer a hand of apology here. Yes I was trolling a little bit (for fun). But the way I was jumped on for having a differing opinion is quite an eye opener.

The way you were 'jumped on' is most probably a reflection of the extremely low esteem that you are undoubtably held in by most posters on this board as a result of your constant and continual negativity when posting (on match day threads in particular).
You are one of a very small band of posters who seem to take great delight in exuding negative vibes about the team or an individual player whenever something hasn't gone the way we would all like.

You must be absolutely suicidal when we actually win a match, which fortunately for you hasn't been very often recently.

As you have now found out, Trolling and/or fishing for somebody with your posting history is unlikely to be seen as amusing, but just yet more negativity .......... and that should be the real eye opener for you!

 

[BensGrandad]

I watched the game in Spain on Bein Sports as better reception than Sky and both John Barnes and Stephan Freud ,I think it was, agreed theirs was not a penalty and that the ref was conned by Monreal and no disputing ours.

 

[Acker79]

or the diving, shirt pulling, blocking off at set pieces and stealing of yards at free kicks and throw ins of football it goes on.

And the one that people never seem to include in the list of ways footballers cheat: deliberately fouling an opponent (to stop a counter, to stop him getting into the box). We don't just accept that, we praise it, encourage it, criticise players who don't do it. But it is a deliberate attempt to break the laws of the game to gain an advantage you don't deserve or to deny the advantage your opponents have earned.

If you started banning for dishonesty in football you'd have no players left.

This is a funny line. Not funny ha-ha. But it's weird how 'if you start banning people for that you'll have no players left' and 'if you start giving red cards, it'll soon stop' are used by people to either support or oppose clamping down on something.

 

[golddene]

Ours wasn't a pen, there's wasn't a pen. Apart from the ref being the usual gash, evens honoured.

Oh yes ours was, you cannot have watched MOTD2 to still have that opinion ! Watch a re-run in iplayer and see the incident again and the "professional pundits" explain the incident.

I responded to your original post before I had fully read the thread? On reflection and reading your responses to other intelligent posters who have also pointed out your obvious error and subsequent "wind up" retorts I have now come to the opinion that any reply to any of your posts now or in the future is completely worthless.

 

[Guinness Boy]

And the one that people never seem to include in the list of ways footballers cheat: deliberately fouling an opponent (to stop a counter, to stop him getting into the box). We don't just accept that, we praise it, encourage it, criticise players who don't do it. But it is a deliberate attempt to break the laws of the game to gain an advantage you don't deserve or to deny the advantage your opponents have earned.

AKA the "good foul"? As a poor quality pub-league centre back I used to make those sorts of challenges and it was just taking one for the team. These days it should be a guaranteed yellow, which means the same player can only do one per game and, after five of them, you're sitting out. It has not stopped the "good foul" at all. Sometimes you just need to do it. See Milner against Newcastle recently.

This is a funny line. Not funny ha-ha. But it's weird how 'if you start banning people for that you'll have no players left' and 'if you start giving red cards, it'll soon stop' are used by people to either support or oppose clamping down on something.

Well the emphasis should have been on the dishonesty. I'm fully behind cards for diving. Cards for a bit of blocking at a corner or stealing five yards on a throw? Not so much.

 

[Acker79]

AKA the "good foul"? As a poor quality pub-league centre back I used to make those sorts of challenges and it was just taking one for the team. These days it should be a guaranteed yellow, which means the same player can only do one per game and, after five of them, you're sitting out. It has not stopped the "good foul" at all. Sometimes you just need to do it. See Milner against Newcastle recently.

See? "It's taking one for the team" "it has to be done". It's cheating. And all the while we (as in British football) don't treat it as such, I don't think we (again, as in British football) have any right to look down on "them foreigners and their diving". If we so willingly 'justify' one form of cheating, what good does it do to come down on another form (especially when the one we're ok with involves risking your opponent's safety and the one we criticise doesn't)?

Isn't risking an opponents safety as bad as dishonesty? Even then, there's often dishonesty in those challenges, the pretence that the player is going for the ball, sometimes claims that they got it etc.

 

[Garage_Doors]

When did Arsenal last beat us? i tried google but it wasn't very helpful.

 

[Bodian]

And the one that people never seem to include in the list of ways footballers cheat: deliberately fouling an opponent (to stop a counter, to stop him getting into the box). We don't just accept that, we praise it, encourage it, criticise players who don't do it. But it is a deliberate attempt to break the laws of the game to gain an advantage you don't deserve or to deny the advantage your opponents have earned.

AKA the "good foul"? As a poor quality pub-league centre back I used to make those sorts of challenges and it was just taking one for the team. These days it should be a guaranteed yellow, which means the same player can only do one per game and, after five of them, you're sitting out. It has not stopped the "good foul" at all. Sometimes you just need to do it. See Milner against Newcastle recently.

See? "It's taking one for the team" "it has to be done". It's cheating. And all the while we (as in British football) don't treat it as such, I don't think we (again, as in British football) have any right to look down on "them foreigners and their diving". If we so willingly 'justify' one form of cheating, what good does it do to come down on another form (especially when the one we're ok with involves risking your opponent's safety and the one we criticise doesn't)?

Isn't risking an opponents safety as bad as dishonesty? Even then, there's often dishonesty in those challenges, the pretence that the player is going for the ball, sometimes claims that they got it etc.

Dunk's booking yesterday was in this category I think. Not dangerous, but deliberate holding to stop a break.

 

[Acker79]

When did Arsenal last beat us? i tried google but it wasn't very helpful.

1st October 2017. Away last season. 2-0. And every other previous meeting between us from then back to February 1983.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Fair play to MOTD for calling out their pen as a dive and ours as a pen.

What on earth were Sky on? I thought I was going mad with Alan smiths commentary, then Redknapp & Scott’s analysis. At least another ex Arsenal striker was able to call it for exactly what it was - a dive. Sky and it’s narrative driven agendas are a joke at times.

 

[Guinness Boy]

See? "It's taking one for the team" "it has to be done". It's cheating. And all the while we (as in British football) don't treat it as such, I don't think we (again, as in British football) have any right to look down on "them foreigners and their diving". If we so willingly 'justify' one form of cheating, what good does it do to come down on another form (especially when the one we're ok with involves risking your opponent's safety and the one we criticise doesn't)?

Isn't risking an opponents safety as bad as dishonesty? Even then, there's often dishonesty in those challenges, the pretence that the player is going for the ball, sometimes claims that they got it etc.

But they are treated as cheating and punished as such with a yellow card and free kick. That was my point. Diving is also treated as such and should be punished by a yellow card as well. It doesn't mean Johnny Foreigner isn't capable of very cynical fouls to break up quick breaks (Busquets springs to mind among others) nor that Brits don't dive (Zaha anyone?). The two things SHOULD be treated in the same way on the field of play.

The issue is players almost never get away with the good foul but often get away with diving. It's sneakier.

 

[Sue1983]

In regards to retrospective bans, presumably they will become a thing of the past with the introduction of VAR?

Also i think that the punishment for trying to get a player sent off through deception should be at least the same as if not harsher than the punishment the player would have got if they con had worked and the opposition numbers were reduced. Bamford, for example, only got a 2 game ban for a dive when the player sent off would have got 3 if it wasn't overturned - if they could get a 4 game ban for that sort of deception, would they still try it?

I concur - how can the punishment for getting a player sent off through deception be less than a red card? How can anyone be so low to do that?

I think It should be 4 game ban at minimum and maybe also a point deduction for their club . That should be enough of a deterrent.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I concur - how can the punishment for getting a player sent off through deception be less than a red card? How can anyone be so low to do that?

I think It should be 4 game ban at minimum and maybe also a point deduction for their club . That should be enough of a deterrent.

Should be 3 games and a 4th game saved for the next times the teams meet

 

[dadams2k11]

Dunk's booking yesterday was in this category I think. Not dangerous, but deliberate holding to stop a break.

This. Dunk did everything to stop Lacazette getting away as he knew we were all out of position and they were on the counter and would've probably scored.

Good foul.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Going to be a very different league next year when the top six lose their extra man.

Liverpool are the only team that has massively benefitted from decisions in there favour this year.

 

[Si Gull]

What on earth were Sky on? I thought I was going mad with Alan smiths commentary, then Redknapp & Scott’s analysis. At least another ex Arsenal striker was able to call it for exactly what it was - a dive. Sky and it’s narrative driven agendas are a joke at times.

One of the reasons I'll never give a penny of my money to Sky (not that they give a toss but it makes me feel better!).