Fixtures Sunday July 12th - Tottenham Hotspur - Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - 4:30 Pm

Kick-Off

       Injuries                    Steve Gleiber



Get the Latest Post Go to the Bottom of Page It is currently Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:38 am

All times are UTC


  


Reply to topic

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], mcquilkie and 2 guests

 
Post #479681  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 11931

Hazuki wrote:
TOP GUN wrote:
Nooooope doesn't kick hazard. touched maybe but not kicked.

This is demonstrably false though.

Just watch this at around 0:18.


Actually Zero contact, even that moron Neville said it wasn't a penalty

Love can only get you through this. Hate won't work.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479682  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5957
Location: Townsville Australia

We are underperforming. Financially only Man City are ahead of us.

http://www.espnfc.com.au/english-premie ... rsenal-psg

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479683  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 8985
Location: The Go-Between Bridge

Decaf wrote:
Niall wrote:

Lets discuss the quality of a steak but the taste and the way it is cooked are irrelevant.


You'd do better to argue with a drunk or a Unionist. This is the guy who thinks that a mild critique of Zionism is tantamount to anti-semetism, and whose rhetorical style is guaranteed to escalate even the most trivial disagreement into WWIII. Thank god he didn't go into the diplomatic service ...


Woah way to change the terms of the debate!!!!

Putting aside a pathetic attempt at escalation that makes you at the very least a rank hypocrite you will see from my posts I have confined myself to nothing more than a discussion of why I think the referee was entitled to give a penalty.

(Ps I do not think that a mild critique of anti-Zionism is tantamount to anti-semitism I have simply saiid that Zionism is a debased term and that anti-semites SOMETIMES hide behind it)


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479684  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:21 pm
Posts: 14065
Location: Stockholm

TOP GUN wrote:
Actually Zero contact

Again, demonstrably false.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479685  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 308
Location: Pompey

i think there are 2 things going on here.

Penalty for Chelsea for Bellerin's infringement (and i like this word because it sort of implies "ok, it was just about a foul").

Yellow card for Hazard for simulation as his reaction to the infringement was to feign injury and to make an attempt to deceive the ref with regards to the severity of the contact.

I'm not sure the simulation laws allow such things so will happily be corrected, but I think its the way to go. You can have yer penalty, but have this card too you divey little bitch. Whilst his reaction should have no impact on the ref's decision, its just another of the things that makes you hate the game so there should be a sanction.

I thought the conservative MP for Arsenal (who looks very nice indeed btw, well done Hodd) had his boot nudged by the chelsea fellas knee which made him tangle his own feet. Unintentional, but a foul. Ainsley didn't embelish the contact with a screaming triple salcow hard onto the deck. So because he didn't sell the contact like Eden Lightfoot he doesn't get the pen and also gets called a diver by the orcs of Pundit Land. How crap is this game?

Jack dived like a weasel. Crap dive. More crap.

_________________
"Rather than spending millions relaying the wembley pitch, they should be putting money into grassroots" - Collymore, Stan


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479686  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29220

Nothing really. Just maintaining my post count. :icon_mrgreen: hehehe

No, actually, I watched the match till the 2nd goal and left the bar. Didn't know we equalized and although its good news, I'm not regretful of leaving the bar.
The PK was a farce. The problem for me is how fast they equalized. When are we going to spend on quality defenders who have built a reputation? A known name.

_________________
"If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken. Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools..." - Rudyard Kipling


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479687  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:06 am
Posts: 13280

Daz wrote:
TOP GUN wrote:

No I don't abide by the terms of your referendum. Hazard saw a player moving his leg and threw himself on the floor. It's conceivable the ref could give a penalty due to the movement of Bellerin but shouldn't have as it wasn't a foul.


Bellerin attempts to kick the ball and kicks Hazard instead. The ref decides that it was done with either reckless, intentional or excessive force and decides it is a foul. Penalty.

Hazard could have put on a unicorn onesie and spat out his liver for all the difference it makes to the issue.


"reckless, intentional or excessive force and decides it is a foul". You must admit that is debatable? It was pretty 50/50 about whether there was anything there. And you should also be able to accept that people who argue against you on such debatable questions neither idiotic nor morally corrupt?

_________________
Hamba kakuhle, Madiba


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479688  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:06 am
Posts: 13280

Daz wrote:
Decaf wrote:

You'd do better to argue with a drunk or a Unionist. This is the guy who thinks that a mild critique of Zionism is tantamount to anti-semetism, and whose rhetorical style is guaranteed to escalate even the most trivial disagreement into WWIII. Thank god he didn't go into the diplomatic service ...


Woah way to change the terms of the debate!!!!

Putting aside a pathetic attempt at escalation that makes you at the very least a rank hypocrite you will see from my posts I have confined myself to nothing more than a discussion of why I think the referee was entitled to give a penalty.

(Ps I do not think that a mild critique of anti-Zionism is tantamount to anti-semitism I have simply saiid that Zionism is a debased term and that anti-semites SOMETIMES hide behind it)

Yeah right.

_________________
Hamba kakuhle, Madiba


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479689  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 8985
Location: The Go-Between Bridge

Also somewhat baffling given my last post to you was agreeing with your point that Hazard's reaction was not relevant.

It is tempting of course to descend into the personal abuse you have clearly initiated there for whatever purpose but that would just give you the opportunity to berate my rhetorical excesses so I'll leave that one with you and your arguably diminished powers of self-reflection.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479690  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 8985
Location: The Go-Between Bridge

Decaf wrote:
Daz wrote:

Woah way to change the terms of the debate!!!!

Putting aside a pathetic attempt at escalation that makes you at the very least a rank hypocrite you will see from my posts I have confined myself to nothing more than a discussion of why I think the referee was entitled to give a penalty.

(Ps I do not think that a mild critique of anti-Zionism is tantamount to anti-semitism I have simply saiid that Zionism is a debased term and that anti-semites SOMETIMES hide behind it)

Yeah right.


I have no choice but surrender in the face of such articulacy.

Anyway as I say you changed a discussion on a penalty into an utterly uncalled for personal attack - I can't be arsed with that this morning especially as you will then snipe at any retaliation as an example of my argumentative nature so I'll depart with nothing more than a cheery: go *%^@ yourself, you apologist for mass murder and prissy, self-regarding, lily-white-handed, Boutique Bolshevik.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479691  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 8985
Location: The Go-Between Bridge

Decaf wrote:
"reckless, intentional or excessive force and decides it is a foul". You must admit that is debatable? It was pretty 50/50 about whether there was anything there. And you should also be able to accept that people who argue against you on such debatable questions neither idiotic nor morally corrupt?


Make it easier for me then by not being an idiot. (I haven't called anybody morally corrupt).

My whole POINT is that the penalty decision was debatable. Actually the sentence you quote is not debatable. That IS what the ref decided and my point was simply that Hazard's reaction had no bearing on that once the referee had decided the nature of Bellerin's kick on Hazard was excessive or reckless (I assume he didn't think it was intentional but that would have been another possible factor).

It is others who are calling the decision farcical or saying categorically it was NEVER a penalty who are adopting closed positions (usually with nothing other than restating it in different words or reaching for a straw man).

Your entreaties for me to be less abrasive sit uneasily anyway with a person who opened their comunication with me with a barrage of personal abuse and a piss-poor attempt to revive an argument about *%^@*** Zionism (while simultaneously complaining that I go in for rhetorical excess!!) I actually don't mind a bit of robust abuse in my direction I do have more of an issue with pinch-and-shriek-for-miss playground hypocrites.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479692  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29220

This reads like a treatise for a movie but I fear it's probably true.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... trump.html

_________________
"If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken. Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools..." - Rudyard Kipling


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479693  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 8985
Location: The Go-Between Bridge

Anyway, whatever to all that, THIS is how to do a post-match interview I imagine it will be right up kiwi's strasse.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_AeszKJ-yI[/youtube]


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479694  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:29 pm
Posts: 4370

Great game.
We played well and didn't deserve to lose.
Funnily enough when Hazard went off I breathed a sigh of relief thinking that was the end of their attacking intent. How wrong I was.
How brilliant was young Ainsley. Looks so confident and calm on the ball. Very assured and exciting. How better would he be in his natural position.
Great goal by Bellerin but we could have lost it again. We just lose concentration so easily and it could have cost us.

What the fck is wenger playing at with Jack's new contract???
Does he want him to stay or not???
Surely should have been done by now.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479695  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 11931

The Trump stuff is just brilliant, it's endless. Everyday something new comes up

He sits in bed eating cheeseburgers watching his 3 tellys shouting at his staff.

What next


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479696  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:09 am
Posts: 6774

TOP GUN wrote:
The Trump stuff is just brilliant, it's endless. Everyday something new comes up

He sits in bed eating cheeseburgers watching his 3 tellys shouting at his staff.

What next


4 tellys

_________________
I'm going to do AG


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479697  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 15980

Gaz from Oz wrote:
We are underperforming. Financially only Man City are ahead of us.

http://www.espnfc.com.au/english-premie ... rsenal-psg

underperforming and drastically underspending


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479698  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 15980

Hazuki wrote:
Just watched the highlights again and counting the big chances for both teams. I counted it to eight each until Chelsea had those last two after we equalized (Moratas attempt and then Zappacosta hitting the crossbar). So roughly equal on chances, a couple of good saves from both keepers although Courtois clearly made the most difficult saves.

What stood out to me was how our big chances came after intricate play and excellent combinations that are hard to defend against for any team, while several of Chelsea's big chances were gifted by us. It's been said many times before, but it's frustrating how hard we need to work for scoring opportunities compared to our opponents who are simply gifted a couple of chances per game.

Exactly right, I've been moaning about this for year. Put Chelsea's back 5 with our front 5 and we would be 20 points better off at the end of this season


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479699  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 2:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 8:52 pm
Posts: 967
Location: Salisbury

Rich wrote:
Gaz from Oz wrote:
We are underperforming. Financially only Man City are ahead of us.

http://www.espnfc.com.au/english-premie ... rsenal-psg

underperforming and drastically underspending


How on earth are they working this out though, Barca are at #13 and Spurs at #5?, makes little sense. Are they factoring in Usmanov's wealth or something?!.

We have about £200m of 'debt', all be it at low interest from the bond that helped finance the Emirates.

We are ultra-conservative though as Kroenke is only interested in profit which is why we are where we are, absolutely zero drive or ambition to win from the top, Wenger maybe but he is past it and incompetent in the modern game, we have got to hope Ivan shines post Wenger, clutching at straws...

_________________
Wake me up when wiggy snuffs it


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479700  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 4:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 3284
Location: Waltham Abbey, Essex

61% of people in a Sky Sports survey say the penalty was not a correct decision.

Imo both Jack and Hazard's dives should be investigated. Jack should get a one game ban and Hazard a 3 game ban.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479701  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 5:00 pm 

bubblechris wrote:
Imo both Jack and Hazard's dives should be investigated. Jack should get a one game ban and Hazard a 3 game ban.

Even if you think the penalty was the wrong decison why do you think Hazard should get banned for two more games than Wilshere? Wasn't Wilshere's a blatant dive? Without seeing it on telly, which is why until now I've not participated in the debate, from watching it live I think Hazard's was less so? Much less so. Even though Arsenal weren't given a penalty for Wilshere's I'd have thought the far more blatant attempt to cheat by him should be more relevant.


  
 
 
Post #479702  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 3284
Location: Waltham Abbey, Essex

Bernard wrote:
bubblechris wrote:
Imo both Jack and Hazard's dives should be investigated. Jack should get a one game ban and Hazard a 3 game ban.

Even if you think the penalty was the wrong decison why do you think Hazard should get banned for two more games than Wilshere? Wasn't Wilshere's a blatant dive? Without seeing it on telly, which is why until now I've not participated in the debate, from watching it live I think Hazard's was less so? Much less so. Even though Arsenal weren't given a penalty for Wilshere's I'd have thought the far more blatant attempt to cheat by him should be more relevant.


Because Jack's did not lead to a booking or a penalty whereas Hazard's overacting fooled the ref who believed imo that he'd been poleaxed.

My main point of contention is that the ref let far worse fouls go unpunished and if this had happened on the field of play he wouldn't have punished the perpetrator, that or he didn't actually see it so was unaware that there was minimal contact and he had lost the ball anyway.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479703  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 3284
Location: Waltham Abbey, Essex

Even Tony Gale thinks it was soft.................


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479704  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:53 pm
Posts: 16966

bubblechris wrote:
Even Tony Gale thinks it was soft.................

Just read there are no English referees going to the world cup. That is staggering and highlights the fall in standards very starkly.

_________________
It's a terrible love and I'm walking with spiders.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479705  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:53 pm
Posts: 16966

Sky linking us to Aubameyang.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/ ... is-sanchez

_________________
It's a terrible love and I'm walking with spiders.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479706  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:21 pm
Posts: 14065
Location: Stockholm

Niall wrote:

Our new chief scout named Aubameyang as one of the two players he fought the hardest for Dortmund to sign (the other one being Kagawa), so our interest is probably genuine.

Class player, my one concern would be that we'd spend a lot of money on a 28 year old whose main attribute is speed.

I'd like to see us go for Mahrez. After coming down to earth a bit last season he has looked very impressive again this year.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479707  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:53 pm
Posts: 16966

Hazuki wrote:
Niall wrote:

Our new chief scout named Aubameyang as one of the two players he fought the hardest for Dortmund to sign (the other one being Kagawa), so our interest is probably genuine.

Class player, my one concern would be that we'd spend a lot of money on a 28 year old whose main attribute is speed.

I'd like to see us go for Mahrez. After coming down to earth a bit last season he has looked very impressive again this year.

He'd be a fantastic signing, top level. He was amazing at St.Etienne.
Yeah Mahrez has had an impressive last few months for Leicester, I'd like to see him too particularly as our right side is currently very poor. Him in and Walcott to Saints wouldn't be a huge surprise.

_________________
It's a terrible love and I'm walking with spiders.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479708  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 15980

bubblechris wrote:
61% of people in a Sky Sports survey say the penalty was not a correct decision.

Imo both Jack and Hazard's dives should be investigated. Jack should get a one game ban and Hazard a 3 game ban.

Niasse was the first player to receive a retrospective ban for diving. In that case it was accepted than Dann make contact with Niasse but that Niasse have overly exaggerated the contact to try to influence or deceive the ref. He got a 2 game ban.
How is this any different to what hazard did? He got kicked on the underside of his boot and lept in the air and rolled around holding his shin.

My biggest gripe with officials and officialdom is the complete lack of consistency. I can understand how one ref may see something differently to another but you see inconsistency in the same game and from the same ref in different games ie Mike dean giving handball against chambers but not against a Leicester players v us on the opening day when a cross hit a hand above the players head!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479709  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 15980

Hazuki wrote:
I'd like to see us go for Mahrez. After coming down to earth a bit last season he has looked very impressive again this year.

Mahrez is really on form. I’m not completely sold on him in our team as he’s not known for his work or impact on the game without the ball - and wenger would just indulge that even further. But I do like that he is a genuinely skilful and natural footballer. We have a few too many players in our team who just seem uncomfortable or uncoordinated with the ball at their feet


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479710  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:53 pm
Posts: 16966

More "parking the bus" on display tonight. ZZZZ

_________________
It's a terrible love and I'm walking with spiders.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479711  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5957
Location: Townsville Australia

Rich wrote:
Hazuki wrote:
Just watched the highlights again and counting the big chances for both teams. I counted it to eight each until Chelsea had those last two after we equalized (Moratas attempt and then Zappacosta hitting the crossbar). So roughly equal on chances, a couple of good saves from both keepers although Courtois clearly made the most difficult saves.

What stood out to me was how our big chances came after intricate play and excellent combinations that are hard to defend against for any team, while several of Chelsea's big chances were gifted by us. It's been said many times before, but it's frustrating how hard we need to work for scoring opportunities compared to our opponents who are simply gifted a couple of chances per game.

Exactly right, I've been moaning about this for year. Put Chelsea's back 5 with our front 5 and we would be 20 points better off at the end of this season

Or another way of looking at it. Give our back 5 to Conte and he would have an aneurysm after 15 minutes. I think Pep would spend a lot of time with them as well, given that he is alleged to stop training and everyone stops and he walks over and physically moves people into where they should be. Have not seen it so it is just a rumour.

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479712  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5957
Location: Townsville Australia

Daz wrote:
Anyway, whatever to all that, THIS is how to do a post-match interview I imagine it will be right up kiwi's strasse.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_AeszKJ-yI[/youtube]

Absolutely brilliant

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479713  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5957
Location: Townsville Australia

Bernard wrote:
bubblechris wrote:
Imo both Jack and Hazard's dives should be investigated. Jack should get a one game ban and Hazard a 3 game ban.

Even if you think the penalty was the wrong decison why do you think Hazard should get banned for two more games than Wilshere? Wasn't Wilshere's a blatant dive? Without seeing it on telly, which is why until now I've not participated in the debate, from watching it live I think Hazard's was less so? Much less so. Even though Arsenal weren't given a penalty for Wilshere's I'd have thought the far more blatant attempt to cheat by him should be more relevant.

Spot on Bernard. Hazard exagerated contact. Wilshire dived. For the record diving really f...en s..ts me big time.

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479714  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 3284
Location: Waltham Abbey, Essex

Rich wrote:
bubblechris wrote:
61% of people in a Sky Sports survey say the penalty was not a correct decision.

Imo both Jack and Hazard's dives should be investigated. Jack should get a one game ban and Hazard a 3 game ban.

Niasse was the first player to receive a retrospective ban for diving. In that case it was accepted than Dann make contact with Niasse but that Niasse have overly exaggerated the contact to try to influence or deceive the ref. He got a 2 game ban.
How is this any different to what hazard did? He got kicked on the underside of his boot and lept in the air and rolled around holding his shin.

My biggest gripe with officials and officialdom is the complete lack of consistency. I can understand how one ref may see something differently to another but you see inconsistency in the same game and from the same ref in different games ie Mike dean giving handball against chambers but not against a Leicester players v us on the opening day when a cross hit a hand above the players head!


Excellent points Rich. Send a copy to AW, we really don't need him serving a stadium ban, or do we?


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479715  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 3284
Location: Waltham Abbey, Essex

Obiang, what a goal. Spurs losing 1-0..................


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479716  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:53 pm
Posts: 16966

What a goal!

_________________
It's a terrible love and I'm walking with spiders.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479717  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5957
Location: Townsville Australia

Watching Spurs Westham - expect Spurs will eventually make all the chances pay or get a really dodgy penalty near the end and then everyone should go into a meltdown about referees and diving again.

Let it go folks. Whether it was a good decision or not is irrelevant. If we had won we would be 21 points behind City. Big f... deal.

Having started this Westham just scored a scorcher. Go the hammers - the battle for 4th is still on.

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479718  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5957
Location: Townsville Australia

2 brilliant goals in his game

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479719  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:57 pm
Posts: 15980

Gaz from Oz wrote:
Watching Spurs Westham - expect Spurs will eventually make all the chances pay or get a really dodgy penalty near the end and then everyone should go into a meltdown about referees and diving again.

Let it go folks. Whether it was a good decision or not is irrelevant. If we had won we would be 21 points behind City. Big f... deal.

Having started this Westham just scored a scorcher. Go the hammers - the battle for 4th is still on.

Battle for 5th I reckon


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479720  Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

Gaz from Oz wrote:
We are underperforming. Financially only Man City are ahead of us.

http://www.espnfc.com.au/english-premie ... rsenal-psg


EPSN can do one on this. What the hall do fixed assets (massively inflated for Arsenal due to having a stadium on some of the most expensive land in the world) have to do with spending power? Not only is this misleading as it implies the value of the stadium is linked to spending power, but also it totally fails to take into account the hundreds of millions pumped into certain teams every year by their owners.

We do underspend, but any suggestion we can compete with City, Utd, Chelsea, PSG, or the spanish giants (or indeed Bayern) is total cloud cuckoo land. We simply can't unless Stan puts his own money in. This isn't to excuse our under-performance compared to Spurs, Monaco or Dortmund (until recently) or our underspending compared to Liverpool, but we do need to be honest.

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
     [ 513596 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 11990, 11991, 11992, 11993, 11994, 11995, 11996 ... 12840  Next

All times are UTC

Gooners Online - Click to see what Everyones Doing

Colour Key:  Visited Profile    Members Profile      Admin

Get Latest Post

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], mcquilkie and 2 guests


Search for:

Go to Top

Powered by php BB © 1993 - 2018