Arsenal v Liverpool - 20:00 Monday 24th August.

[City169]

Arsenal were shocking in the first half and made Liverpool look far better than they were IMO. Arsenal unlucky to have the goal disallowed but I don't think you can be too harsh on the lino there as it was tight and doesn't get the benefit of another look. second half Arsenal were better, but still not great, Liverpool seemed happy to sit deep and Arsenal just couldn't get through, bringing Walcott on against such a deep team seemed odd to me as he needs space behind to run into

 

[thespus]

Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.

If you don't want me to take the piss, own up to your bizarre overreaction to this post:

Gomez has looked great this season, but Oxlade-Chamberlain had his way after coming on. It can be argued Gomez was sucking wind at this point, so tough to judge. The main point: START OXLADE-CHAMBERLAIN. He's really good, m'kay.

I thought Gabriel and Coquelin were ace. Gabriel needs to learn some marking nuances and work on distribution, but it's clear to see why Wenger rates him - he's Koscielny mk. II. Ramsey scored the goal and was likely our best attacking player. If anyone thinks we don't have a striker problem, here are some fun stats: Arsenal have created more chances and taken more shots than any team in the league thus far. Özil and Cazorla are 2 of the top 3 in chances created, yet only have one assist (Cazorla had one last night to Ramsey, tbf). Özil didn't lose the ball until Liverpool were parked and he had to try and force it. He made dribbles in tight spaces that were mesmerizing. It's a damn shame we don't have a top CF to finish for the best chance creator in the league.

And the official is why Arsenal didn't

Nowhere did I say anything which warranted a personal insult.

Why has no one picked up on the fact that G-Dragon just said Liverpool's chances of winning the game would have actually increased had the Arsenal goal stood as it should have!?

Thought policing does not apply in this situation. I'll let you extrapolate.

 

[G-Dragon]

Why has no one picked up on the fact that G-Dragon just said Liverpool's chances of winning the game would have actually increased had the Arsenal goal stood as it should have!?

Just being sarcastic since Arsenal fans are hell bent on arguing that Arsenal would have won had Ramsey goal stood. At least Claude talked some sense yesterday, smh.

 

[Bilo]

If you don't want me to take the piss, own up to your bizarre overreaction to this post:

You're not taking the piss when you quote others to talk about me in third person only to paraphrase trying to convince others I said something I didn't. You're just coming across as a bit of a dick.

I thought it was funny that you mentioned one single event five times in two rather short posts, then PERHAPS I made an example out of you having read the same shit over and over since last night. I didn't think you'd take offense, and if you did I'll think twice the next time.

 

[thespus]

PERHAPS I made an example out of you having read the same shit over and over since last night.

Maybe don't read the match-day thread if you won't want to read about the same events over and over again - you realise this forum doesn't exist entirely for your reading pleasure? Narcissistic thought-policing - I'll include another example:

Bilo to Stevencc on page 110 of the Transfer Rumours Thread:

You spout so much shit about him, but whenever I actually do bother to tell you why you're wrong, you resort to sarcasm and shit like "this really irks you", bla bla bla. Why are you even on the board? Your post count is sad, at best, but seriously: every time I've actually been here to discuss this matter you're obsessed with, you refrain from producing any arguments whatsoever.

I'd rather be the victim of one of your tirades, than the guy telling a poster on the internet, via the internet, that his presence on the internet is sad.

 

[Bilo]

Maybe don't read the match-day thread if you won't want to read about the same events over and over again - you realise this forum doesn't exist entirely for your reading pleasure? Narcissistic thought-policing - I'll include another example:

Bilo to Stevencc on page 110 of the Transfer Rumours Thread:



I'd rather be the victim of one of your tirades, than the guy telling a poster on the internet, via the internet, that his presence on the internet is sad.

I'm not even sure what your point is anymore.

You feel my post was narcissistic thought policing? It wasn't, it was pointing out that the offside decision was a much smaller event than it has been made out by most Arsenal supporters on this forum, including you. Then you've just gone on this spin that I'm thought policing but I offered arguments very simple to understand that you are yet to even address. Instead you're doing, well, this. Frankly I have no idea how to respond to it. If it wasn't for the quotes you're obsessively digging up I'd even doubt that you were addressing me.

That you mentioned it five times in two posts was funny, and that's why I pointed it out. Like I said, I didn't think you'd take offense.

 

[thespus]

I'm not even sure what your point is anymore.

You feel my post was narcissistic thought policing? It wasn't, it was pointing out that the offside decision was a much smaller event than it has been made out by most Arsenal supporters on this forum, including you. .

The bolded bit exemplifies my point. Bilo, as an individual, doesn't not determine what's worth discussing and what's not. If you want to have a conversation, try "the offside decision is a smaller event than Arsenal fans believe it is".

Petr Cech was often discussed as the reason Liverpool didn't win - why aren't the Arsenal fans condescending mentions of Cech?

 

[Bilo]

The bolded bit exemplifies my point - the lack of self-awareness is astounding. Bilo, as an individual, doesn't not determine what's worth discussing and what's not. If you want to have an actual conversation, maybe don't begin it with patronisation - maybe try "the offside decision is a smaller event than I perceive Arsenal fans believe it is".

Have a read through the thread and tell me that Liverpool fans don't do the logical equivalent with Petr Cech being the difference maker. Petr Cech is actually an Arsenal player; the linesman is not supposed to be a variable in the match - yet you don't see any Arsenal fan condescending Liverpool fans for their mentions of Cech, do you?

By now I'm pretty much 100% sure you're actively trying to take what I said in the worst way possible. Not at any point did I say it wasn't worth discussing, in fact, I'd have gladly discussed it if you just bothered responding to my original point instead of this, I don't even know what it is, thought police-catching of yours? No one - literally no one - posts like your example in quotation marks.

This whole thing is ridiculous, I'm not sure what you're getting at and I doubt I will no matter how many times you repeat it.

 

[JoshBCFC]

Can we just open up a thread called thespus vs bilo? I'm falling asleep here, looking for an actual genuinely good comment about the match, not a pointless argument.

 

[Pagnell]

The sexual tension between them is palpable.

 

[thespus]

Since the handbags are my fault for mentioning the disallowed goal, I've quoted the posts before our spat below with some interesting alternatives to discussing the disallowed goal - a small event, I'm told

Gomez has looked great this season, but Oxlade-Chamberlain had his way after coming on. It can be argued Gomez was sucking wind at this point, so tough to judge. The main point: START OXLADE-CHAMBERLAIN. He's really good, m'kay.

I thought Gabriel and Coquelin were ace. Gabriel needs to learn some marking nuances and work on distribution, but it's clear to see why Wenger rates him - he's Koscielny mk. II. Ramsey scored the goal and was likely our best attacking player. If anyone thinks we don't have a striker problem, here are some fun stats: Arsenal have created more chances and taken more shots than any team in the league thus far. Özil and Cazorla are 2 of the top 3 in chances created, yet only have one assist (Cazorla had one last night to Ramsey, tbf). Özil didn't lose the ball until Liverpool were parked and he had to try and force it. He made dribbles in tight spaces that were mesmerizing. It's a damn shame we don't have a top CF to finish for the best chance creator in the league.



And the official is why Arsenal didn't

Whose starting place would OX take, Ramsey's?

I'd of taken 0-0 before the game, but weirdly it's one of those where both teams will feel a bit disappointed not to get all 3. Arsenal because of the goal, although it is very tight, and Liverpool because of the chances created and Cech.

Really impressed with Joe Gomez too. Hopefully he can keep this type of form up and then we can get £40mil for him in a season or two when City come calling. He's giving Lovren quite a bit of protection too who's having a decent start to the season. 7 points from the 3 games so far is good, and nothing but a win against West Ham will ease the pressure with the next 5 away games coming up.

It's dependent on the opponent, but one of Cazorla and Ramsey. It's harsh on both, but Oxlade-Chamberlain is a special talent and only needs one good run of games to get the confidence to reach an elite level.



I don't think there was a disparity in chances or near goals. In particular, Martkin Skrtel's wonderful intervention on Chamberlain's squared ball for Walcott prevented a tap-in and winning goal. Alexis hit the post from 6 yards, Giroud slipped with only Mignolet to beat, Ramsey's deflected shot required a great save from Mignolet, and obviously the goal which should have stood.

Emphasis mine, but I think there are a few interesting talking points:

- Should one of Cazorla/Ramsey be dropped for Oxlade-Chamberlain?
- Is Mignolet's performance not getting due credit because of Cech? I thought he was ace for someone whom received so much flack his first season.
- Ablur mentioned three points being necessary for Liverpool before looming away matches and a sense of disappointment at a draw for both sides. Are Liverpool fans upset with the result?
- Gabriel and Coquelin performed admirably in recovering for the calamitous turnovers in our own end, mostly from Chambers.
- Why is "to be fair, it was very tight" cliche so commonplace in these situations? At the elite level of all careers, people are expected to perform in the tightest margins. Do we have double standards? Think of the folks in the service industry that routinely catch hell for human mistakes. When should line judges be held accountable by the FA for incorrect decisions?

 

[Ablur]

It's dependent on the opponent, but one of Cazorla and Ramsey. It's harsh on both, but Oxlade-Chamberlain is a special talent and only needs one good run of games to get the confidence to reach an elite level.



I don't think there was a disparity in chances or near goals. In particular, Martkin Skrtel's wonderful intervention on Chamberlain's squared ball for Walcott prevented a tap-in and winning goal. Alexis hit the post from 6 yards, Giroud slipped with only Mignolet to beat, Ramsey's deflected shot required a great save from Mignolet, and obviously the goal which should have stood.

Also, "it is very tight" is not justification for an incorrect call. Not you in particular; I see this rhetoric offered often in similar situations. In most careers, people reach the elite levels because he/she can perform in the tightest margins. I don't understand what "it is very tight" has to offer other than politicising.

If we're being technical about things, then any part of a player in which you can score with is judged to be offside, and Ramsey's shoulder was in an offside position.

The benefit should go to the striker but it so rarely does. It's the same situation as fouls that are fouls outside the box, but never given inside the box, or the defender usually gets the free kick if it's 6 in 1 inside the box etc..

It is easy for yesterday's decision to be made either way hence why it is actually a tight call, but against Bournemouth that was just an awful decision.

 

[Pagnell]

If we're being technical about things, then any part of a player in which you can score with is judged to be offside, and Ramsey's shoulder was in an offside position.

As I explained last night, I also think his head might have been, but I've yet to see a direct, straight on photo the moment the ball was kicked. It's such a ridiculously tight call, but I don't think it's as ridiculous a decision as made out, especially given the linesman having to make it on the spot in real time.

 

[thespus]

If we're being technical about things, then any part of a player in which you can score with is judged to be offside, and Ramsey's shoulder was in an offside position.
.

Where did you gather that from? His hand, maybe, but even that looks before Skrtel's bum. An angle coming from the center (below) favours the nearer object, yet it still looks onside. The line judge should have been in an even better position.

What do we think of video technology? It takes 1-2 minutes to have a look and these decisions are worth tens of millions of dollars to clubs.

 

[Bilo]

He's definitely onside in my book, but yeah, it's ridiculously tight.

 

[SALTIRE]

He's onside and even if he was a head off, it should be given in my book as the forward should always have the benefit of the doubt. In fact I think attackers should be allowed a yard offside to be counted - we want entertaining games and goals.

 

[JimJams]

So then all you do is confuse the situation with people saying 'he was a yard and a half' or 'he was half a yard on'.
Let's just scrap offside. Never did any harm on the park.

Jumpers for goalposts....

Isn't it?

 

[SALTIRE]

So then all you do is confuse the situation with people saying 'he was a yard and a half' or 'he was half a yard on'.
Let's just scrap offside. Never did any harm on the park.

Jumpers for goalposts....

Isn't it?

If there is a clear gap between defender and attacker (where the defender couldn't possibly clear the ball), yes make it offside. If its closer, then make it onside. Simples. It would eliminate some of this confusion anyway and result in higher scoring games.

 

[Stevencc]

He's onside and even if he was a head off, it should be given in my book as the forward should always have the benefit of the doubt. In fact I think attackers should be allowed a yard offside to be counted - we want entertaining games and goals.

You must loved Benteke's "goal" against Bournemouth then.

 

[merseyboyred]

Winning incredibly spawnily to break 'plucky underdogs' is great tbf.

 

[Nath]

Not really. Giroud was better than Ozil and Sanchez tonight. Now Walcott...he is a waste.

He still missed various chances. Chances a world class striker would have put away. Arsenal will not win the league with Giroud leading the line. Simple as.