marcus2011
New Member
I assume Garbriels foul on Hazard in earlier moment in penalty box does not deserve attention where he wrestled him off the ball ?
No, it doesn't deserve attention.I assume Garbriels foul on Hazard in earlier moment in penalty box does not deserve attention where he wrestled him off the ball ?
Yeah I thought so . You still need to get Costa out of your system to start seeing things more clearly .No, it doesn't deserve attention.
What has Costa got to do with that situation? I didn't think it was a penalty at the time and I still don't. The reason people don't give it the attention you think it deserves is because most people, bar the Chelsea fans, agree with the ref. It wasn't a penalty even if it did toe the line a bit.Yeah I thought so . You still need to get Costa out of your system to start seeing things more clearly .
We were the better team before the sending off.Honestly we didn't play that badly down to ten men. Chelsea weren't very threatening, the sending off changed the game and mike dean shouldn't referee another game for us in a while. Costa should have been off.
Ok someone here pointed out that Howard Webb commented on the game decisions ? You should listen to his commentary on foul with Hazard , it is very much opposite to what you think . So , should I rely on your word or someone who has done quiet a bit of refereeing in his life ? I assume you think it will be no brainer to go with Howard Webb analysis because simply other bitter fans along with you think it was not penalty and at least a yellow . ok .What has Costa got to do with that situation? I didn't think it was a penalty at the time and I still don't. The reason people don't give it the attention you think it deserves is because most people, bar the Chelsea fans, agree with the ref. It wasn't a penalty even if it did toe the line a bit.
This is just plain odd.Ok someone here pointed out that Howard Webb commented on the game decisions ? You should listen to his commentary on foul with Hazard , it is very much opposite to what you think . So , should I rely on your word or someone who has done quiet a bit of refereeing in his life ? I assume you think it will be no brainer to go with Howard Webb analysis because simply other bitter fans along with you think it was not penalty and at least a yellow . ok .
Mate He was no where near the ball !! He basically grabbed him and dragged him from the ball . By the book that is at least yellow and penalty ! By the book If you played football at least the one on Sunday , you should know this does not fly with referees .This is just plain odd.
You shouldn't rely on anyone's word given that it's a matter of opinion. What you should do, and I'm only telling you this because you asked, is form an opinion of your own.
By the book, it's possibly a pen. But so is every single shirt pull, and that's also a yellow. So by the book, every defensive player in every game should get sent off. I don't think it's a pen because it's a wrestle for the ball. It's a bit dirty, but no more than what you get in most set piece situations.
You're missing the point. The game isn't officiated 100% by the book, and it hasn't been for as long as I can remember. Consistency is preferred, and in my opinion letting the Gabriel/Hazard situation go was correct, as it was more consistent. By the same token I don't scream at the top of my lungs for every shirt pull not given, because they're too common for the ref to give them all.Mate He was no where near the ball !! He basically grabbed him and dragged him from the ball . By the book that is at least yellow and penalty ! By the book If you played football at least the one on Sunday , you should know this does not fly with referees .
I'm sure if we were discussing the merits of an impulse murderer and one who pre-plans murder we'd all agree the pre planned murder is worse. But this is partisan football where reason and logic goes out the window.That's not what I said. I said the biting isn't comparable because it isn't in any way systematical.
“It’s not pre-planned — it’s a very spontaneous, emotional response,” is how Thomas Fawcett, a University of Salford sports psychologist, explained Suarez’s 2013 bite to the BBC. “He’s doing it on impulse.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...athletes-bite-like-uruguays-luis-suarez-bite/
No pleasing some.what's the kerfuffle, don't you lot usually like it when underdogs win
My god, Garth's team of the week's are plain terrible. He's one of the worst pundits IMO.Underrated pundit imo.
I thought it was alright until he started having a go at Mike Dean. Not really relevant to his original point and just makes it personal for no reason.
I assume Garbriels foul on Hazard in earlier moment in penalty box does not deserve attention where he wrestled him off the ball ?
They did....well at least tried to. Oxlade got a bit hot under the color and Costa barely blinked.Can't believe nobody in the Arsenal team didn't go through Costa. Give a bit back instead of letting him get away with all his antics. Soft.
W88 | W88 trang chu | KUBET Thailand |
Fun88 | 12Bet | Get top UK casino bonuses for British players in casinos not on GamStop |
---|---|---|
The best ₤1 minimum deposit casinos UK not on GamStop | Find the best new no deposit casino get bonus and play legendary slots | Best UK online casinos list 2022 |
No-Verification.Casino | Casinos that accept PayPal | Top online casinos |
sure.bet | miglioriadm.net: siti scommesse non aams | |
Need help with your academic papers? Customwritings offers high-quality professionals to write essays that deserve an A! |