Soccerball – 2017/18 jumpers for goalposts megathread
Same people in charge when the Suarez nonsense happened.
Anyway, they’ve ****ed it again as usual.
It’s now just amusing to see how bad it gets.
…relatively speaking of course. I know Arsenal are still a top 8 side. But it’s just the same shit over and over. Most expensive tickets, 2 billionaire shareholders, players leaving etc etc. Just gets tiresome. I’m just going to be watching Posh this season I reckon.Posted 8 months ago
I don’t really get why Pep has been so infatuated with Sanchez, while he improves the squad I don’t see how he offers anything that different to quality players we already have. I would have rather he had gone for Aubameyang from Dortmund, or if hew was going to grab a striker from the gunners Giroud would have added a tactical option we currently don’t have, a striker of his ilk would have made much more sense.Posted 8 months agojambalayaSubscriber
Wenger was fabulous and Arsenal played some wonderful football under his watch. However, that’s past tense. I think the supporters are rightly frustrated that the PL has been quite open the last few seasons and Arsenal have not been contenders. Koeman to go there ?Posted 8 months agomikewsmithSubscriber
muggomagic – Member
Weird that Ross Barkley apparently decided he didn’t want to join Chelsea part way through his medical!
Maybe it was the rubber glove bit?
Anyway great day on tyneside, hopefully sky had somebody waiting there all day just in case.
Krul out was expected and been trying to for ages, he went to Ajax to prove himself and proved excellent the knee held up picking the ball from the back of the net repeatadly. Last year of contract so time to cash in.
Next to leave? Rafa.Posted 8 months ago
It’s a sorry state of affairs up there, Cashly needs to be gone, we would probably accept an owner with less cash but more integrity at this stage – wouldn’t be hard.
PSG are taking the piss aren’t they? Effectively 400m on 2 players in this window? I know they’ve put off paying for Mbappe for a year but theyre also paying these 2 a fortune in wages. Plus they’ve been done for breaking the FFP rules before. If UEFA ignore that then they may as well scrap the whole FFP thing as it’s clearly a load of bollocks and just let these clubs spend whatever they want.Posted 8 months ago
I see la liga is still throwing a hissy fit because barca and real are not getting enough privileged treatment from uefa.
They have already rigged the game in their favour with the “historical success” distribution of champions league money, and conveniently ignored state sponsorship when it benefited the two Spanish giants. What wonderful new distorted rules are they going to come up with now to ensure their continued success.Posted 8 months ago
I also have Mane in my fantasy football team, fortunately balanced out by also having de Bruyne and Jesus.
It was a definite red as well, can’t understand why their is so much discussion about it, it was as clear a red as could be.
Stoke played really well, shame the commentators still keep labelling them as just a physical well organised team, they have well moved on from that.Posted 8 months ago
To make matters worse I had De Bruyne and transferred him last week 😕
Stoke looked really good going forward today. The two goals were really well worked. People who think of them as the old Tony Pulis side are going to have to reappraise them. It’s going to be a tough place to go on today’s showing
And Manes red was nailed on. It wasn’t malicious, but it was definitely reckless. You can’t go in with your studs up at head height. He could have done him some serious damagePosted 8 months agoeruptronMember
If UEFA ignore that then they may as well scrap the whole FFP thing as it’s clearly a load of bollocks and just let these clubs spend whatever they want
FFP is bollocks indeed. Proof that the clubs are controlling UEFA to protect themselves. They’ve had their time and spend their money. They don’t like any new clubs muscling in on their financial party that they’ve had locked down for years. Now we’ve got the likes of Gill pulling the seeding string to favour the likes of Utd which which is so awful and blatantly it makes you wonder how it can morally go on!Posted 8 months ago
I can’t believe that Liverpool are now contesting the ban, and some of the comments by the pundits have been absolutely ridiculous, it is actually starting to piss me off the stupidity of the excuses being made. It seems that Klops charisma and the way his team have been playing of late have clouded their judgement, if anything that tackle should be looked at in relation to having the ban lengthened.
If Mane was to control the ball without knowing Ederson was there, the highest his foot would have been is waist height. His foot was at head height because he knew the goalkeeper was there, that is reckless no what if or buts, and the injury just proves why the rule is correct.
Posted 8 months ago
Anyone who says that challenge wasn’t reckless is a bloody idiot!. It was wildly reckless. And the damage he’s done just proves it. You can’t go in for a 50/50 ball with your studs up at head height. The straight red was totally justified!
Anyway… Woys back. It seems that with all the comments about how well the season has started….. with everyone looking to play fast, free-flowing attacking football, Crystal Palace has decided they’ll not be having any of that nonsense. They’re going to look to bore the opposition into defeat instead 😀Posted 8 months agodragonMember
it is actually starting to piss me off the stupidity of the excuses being made.
The pundits saying it wasn’t a red are badly out of touch with reality. It was red card every day of the week for me and looking at those injury’s probably deserves to be a bit lengthier as well.Posted 8 months agotheotherjonvSubscriber
agree completely with the red card.
I can also understand what the pundits said, that there was no malice and they’d have gone in for it too, but that’s the changing game now. It doesn’t have to be malicious, you have to control yourself to not simply not be malicious but also to have proper regard for the safety of a fellow player, and to realise (even in the heat of the moment in a game) that what you are about to do, be it a raised foot, or a swinging arm, or a ‘committed’ (euphemism) tackle – that if it endangers the opponent then you’ve committed a sending off offence.
What was interesting (and i can’t remember the game) but there was a game the following day i think where there was a similar incident but no contact made, no injury, no foul called – but the intent or lack of it was exactly the same, the lack of thought for the safety of the opponent was the same, but the sanction totally different (ie none) – and at the time the radio pundits were saying that Liverpool should use the incident to appeal the decision on the basis of consistency!Posted 8 months ago
MAybe the fact they’re ex-professionals and are currently respected pundits means they
actuallythink they know a bit more about football than you lot ?
The problem is they are seeing themselves in that position, and know they’d do exactly the same thing, so they empathise with Mane. The fact is if you go for a ball like that and get the ball and miss the opponent and score then great (assuming the keeper doesn’t have to take evasive action to avoid your head high boot), but if you catch the opponent then it’s a red.Posted 8 months ago
but that’s the changing game now
Funnily enough, the consensus for pundits who were players in the 70s and 80’s seems to be that it would have been red then as well, it’s the more recently retired pundits who want to portray that they were harder than reality who seem to be excusing it.
That is quite a common theme though, exPosted 8 months ago
playersprima donnas like Sherwood and Savage calling current players pampered and trying to pretend that they were hardmen 10 years ago.theotherjonvSubscriber
The fact is if you go for a ball like that and get the ball and miss the opponent and score then great (assuming the keeper doesn’t have to take evasive action to avoid your head high boot), but if you catch the opponent then it’s a red.
Reality – yes; but as I said above the offence is committed when you endanger your opponent, not when you injure him.
So really it should be……
The fact is if you go for a ball like that and get the ball and miss the opponent and score then
great (assuming the keeper doesn’t have to take evasive action to avoid your head high boot), but if you catch the opponent then it’s a red.the referee disallows the goal and sends you off for endangering the safety of an opponent with ‘excessive force’.
Which in itself is an interpretation, if you’re reckless it’s a yellow card but reckless and with excessive force it’s red; and seems to me that in most cases while the excessive bit can be interpreted as whether you kicked him or kicked him hard, when it’s a boot in the face it’s pretty well automatically deemed ‘excessive’ force because there’s hardly an appropriate level of force to use when kicking an opponent in the face 😉Posted 8 months agoRockape63Member
I didn’t have any doubts it was a red. My thinking that it was completely immaterial whether there was intent or not….the attacker knows the keeper is coming for the ball and just to raise your foot means you have a high chance of damaging your opponent.
I played the game for years up front and never kicked a goalie.Posted 8 months agoCletusMember
I cannot believe that Liverpool are appealing that red card. 3 matches is the standard ban for a red for excessive force so I cannot see any grounds for it. The FA should add and extra game to the ban as the appeal is clearly frivolous.
The scousers should really be keeping their heads down and practice defending as their collapse was embarrassing. It is not even as if they attacked for the rest of the match. Klopp seems pretty one dimensional as a manager.Posted 8 months ago
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.