Sigh...there is nothing remotely similar to the football the more physical Arsenal played back in the day and the rugby Stoke embarass the EPL with. You see, that Arsenal team although much stronger still played the best football in the land and were a superb passing side. Stoke, can jus throw a ball far and injure opponents. Stoke is worse than the Allardyce bolton, who also didnt qualify as a football team.
Arsenal had stood up GREAT to the physical teams this season compared to seasons past. And they beat the two rugby teams 4 out of 5 times. So they doing fine in that aspect. Physical teams are great. I myself love it when im playing. But some teams overdue it.
"It's something Jamaica uses and you same one will defend it" and here in lies the EXACT reason we cant go anywhere in football, we use shit rugby tactics.
Jagunner, in truth the Gunners surprised me winning against Stoke. With that horrific injury on 71 mins I was sure the game would end in a draw but they found a way to refocus quickly and take the game credit to them for that. I think the more physical Gunners played the 2nd best football in England, the Treble Winners were more attractive but once they mixed in Pires, Henry, Wiltord and others the undefeated Gunners were the perfect mix of grit and skill and easy to appreciate.
On Jamaica's tactics, it works in our favour psychologically and then against us when we win possession and the smaller teams particularly the Central Americans resort to diving to win freekicks and get our guys cautioned or sent off. But still don't underestimate the power of intimidation. The US uses it too against the smaller teams and since they get the benefit of many many many key calls it works very well for them.
I meant that Gunners team was the best in their era. No doubt the Treble winning United side was the best of their era aswell. To pick a winner between the two would be difficult. A shame they both couldnt of been played at the same time.
Yes Technic.. I agree Shawcross tackle wasn't a dirty tackle but Shawcross did go hard.
But my point was more about the attitude and approach of other clubs.
It seems now acceptable to approach a game saying rough them up rather than play football. Its so acceptable now that only Arsenal seem to suffer casualties. And its justified thru saying arsenal midgets and arsenal need to toughen up. Arsenal need to get bigger players..
Dafoe is small. Robinho is small. So is wright phillips. Is Ashley Cole and Joe Cole any bigger than Fabregas?? As we label some pepes racists some of us are just "sizists??" Its just discrimination. Whether big or not they are talented.... or are we saying small people dont have any business playing football??
Daley is the only Jamaican I can think of that deliberatrely plays dirty. The others IMO get booked or judged unfairly bcoz of the prejudice of the officials I say..
My point with King is that he was standing up 4 himself. The girl intended to provoke a reaction through humiliation.
Arsenal of old did exactly what other teams were doing. Arsenal under wenger and various other managers have transformed the game since then and there is no excuse for not playing football in the same way how the two footed challenge has been outlawed its the same way premeditated rough and dirty play must get outlawed.
_________________________
They make the world so hard
Yes Technic.. I agree Shawcross tackle wasn't a dirty tackle but Shawcross did go hard.
But my point was more about the attitude and approach of other clubs.
It seems now acceptable to approach a game saying rough them up rather than play football. Its so acceptable now that only Arsenal seem to suffer casualties. And its justified thru saying arsenal midgets and arsenal need to toughen up. Arsenal need to get bigger players..
Dafoe is small. Robinho is small. So is wright phillips. Is Ashley Cole and Joe Cole any bigger than Fabregas?? As we label some pepes racists some of us are just "sizists??" Its just discrimination. Whether big or not they are talented.... or are we saying small people dont have any business playing football??
Daley is the only Jamaican I can think of that deliberatrely plays dirty. The others IMO get booked or judged unfairly bcoz of the prejudice of the officials I say..
My point with King is that he was standing up 4 himself. The girl intended to provoke a reaction through humiliation.
Arsenal of old did exactly what other teams were doing. Arsenal under wenger and various other managers have transformed the game since then and there is no excuse for not playing football in the same way how the two footed challenge has been outlawed its the same way premeditated rough and dirty play must get outlawed.
Yuh still nuh get it jt. Nobody is defending dirty tactics we are defending physical ball. I'm not calling Jamaica a dirty team I leave that to the Batistutas of the World. But I am saying we "go hard or go home" and sometimes we go too hard and we go home. I am not saying rough up the Gunners and play for a draw but as I said in my previous post there are many situations that are very legal in football where strength is what gives you the edge on a 50-50 ball for example shoulder to shoulder is not a foul so if my guy is bigger and bounce your little guy off the ball it's a completely legal way to win a ball which can stop a goal or set up a goal.
In terms of sizists, Romario and Maradona were small players too (but stocky) and that's part of why I love football and the Yankis don't...they feel if you not a Steroid using giant you shouldn't dominate a sport. But there is a physical component in our game and when you small like Nasri or Cesc who are short and not so built and you play central midfield, a ball winning position you are at a disadvantage against top teams who build around that position with aggressive, strong players. It's worse in England where the refs are much more lenient than the refs on the continent where Arsene's players all come from. But it's not just size it's attitude, Davids a dominant central mid is very short as well but he was nicknamed "pitbull" and Paul Scholes also a shorty never dominated the position but has survived partly because of his aggression plus his attacking abilities.
Just saying Arsenal never replaced Vieira (not small) and it shows.
Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 2213
Loc: New York, NY
Offline
I hear you jt. As a neutral I like the way Arsenal plays the game, but sometimes the self righteous non sense coming out of Wenger and the fan's just aggravates. What makes football interesting are the different styles and skill levels of the teams and players and how people adjust. It seems that according to some of the Arsenal fans teams should just lay down and let Arsenal pass the ball around them and trash them 5 or 6 love. it nuh guh so. If I am playing for one of the relegation threatened teams, and I need a result against Arsenal, I would think that, within the rules, you can get in their faces a bit. This does not work with Chelsea or Man Utd, why can't Wenger see that he needs a bit of steel in the middle to compete.
It seems you have never actually LISTENED to what Wenger has ever said. He has never said all teams should play the Arsenal way and has said MANY times he doesnt hate physicality and even enjoys a good physical game. What he is against is rugby side like stoke and bolton who go out there to deliberatly hack at the legs of players and play negative football. Im sure we can ALL agree no1 likes seeing this.
'A good tackle is as beautiful to watch as a good volley, for example. But you have to be sure about the quality of the tackling."
'I don't have a problem with the physical game because I love commitment but it is down to intention and technical ability of the player."
'If tough tackling is with a desire to hurt your opponent, it is not acceptable. The beauty in sport is to win in respect the rule'
Wenger quotes on physical play. he has NO problem with it.
but then when u have idiots like this guy "We know how to play Arsenal,we have to kick them.’Ricardo Fuller...obviously some ppl have different ideas on football, cuz according to fuller the way to beat arsenal is not through playing football, but through kicking.
and then people turn around and say some teams dont target players. ye right
Tackling is a skill in football, just like any other and the better players are more skillful in most things they do on the football pitch.
If players are going out to play Arsenal with a mentality that says, 'we'll kick them off the park' because we can't match them for skills, that's just thuggery and not football at all but unfortunately, has always been a part of football.
When Wenger was moaning about getting an arseing from both Manchester United and Chelsea, he wasn't moaning about being 'kicked off the park'. He was just being a poor loser and that got people's backs up.
Both Manchester United and Chelsea have the best players in the land who have the ball skills and tackling skills and mentality to beat Arsenal without 'kicking' them off the park.
Arsenal are a joy to watch when they have the game going their way, like tonight against Porto but to win in England, they will have to match both Manchester United and Chelsea in all departments of the game.
I want to Arsenal step up and show that, this season, they can take their game and beat these two teams to win something and quit bitching and finding excuses if they can't.
I think all the neutrals in England want to see that.
'A good tackle is as beautiful to watch as a good volley, for example. But you have to be sure about the quality of the tackling."
'I don't have a problem with the physical game because I love commitment but it is down to intention and technical ability of the player."
'If tough tackling is with a desire to hurt your opponent, it is not acceptable. The beauty in sport is to win in respect the rule'
Wenger quotes on physical play. he has NO problem with it.
I read this quote in the run up to the Burnley game. He has said he understands that the game is physical, no problem there. Where he has run into problems is the part in bold. He is defaming Shawcross here that's against the law not FIFA's law but the laws of the Crown. There isn't division as to the intent even most Arsenal fans recognise it was an accident and basically ALL neutrals as well and that's the problem. If you have an accident on the road and you go around telling people thrpugh the media that the other driver is a criminal you are wrong! And I mean legally as well as morally.
If Fuller said what he said I hope it was just about getting in their faces on the pitch and not about being malicious with intent to injure - but I'd like to hear Jt's since he feels it's just Daley and Jamaicans don't play rough . I'd also like to see the full context of Fuller's comments because taken just as is it shown it does look bad. But on the other hand the same way Pulis was upset at the accusations thrown at his player so could Fuller be because I thought Wenger went too far. You can understand Wenger venting in the moment but the statement above showed that after some time to reflect he again has accused Shawcross of intent to hurt Ramsey and not negligence. So in the same way Wenger reacts with a harsh quote when his players get accused of things I'd like to know if it's a reaction from Fuller or if he as a beaten up striker who plays pretty ball is really supporting that idea of defenders hacking forwards down. Now that would be ironic wouldn't it?
As you said most Arsenal fans recognise it was an accident. Even Wenger. Wenger never said Shawcross intentionally broke his leg. He said he went in too hard. And the fact his leg snapped in two is proof of that to me. Im 100% shawcross didnt mean to break his leg. im 100% sure shawcross meant to get the ball. and im 100% sure shawcross intended to make contact with the player so he "knew he was there". How many people have heard of those old fashioned cbs who like to let the opponents "know they are there". Thats shawcross. But this is an isolated incident and in truth just a terrible terrible accident. However, im not surprised it did. That is what stoke is.
everything jagrunner ah say mi say to... lol. chat bout.
but with regards to fuller, fuller is not a dirty player. He is one of them strong players you talked about. But lets not kid ourselves. Being a strong player is not the same as going in hard.
_________________________
They make the world so hard
Ye im not saying Fuller is dirty. There is a difference between physcial and overphysical. Everton, Wigan, Fulham are physical but they play with in the rules. Stoke,Bolton, and even Hull are overphysical and there in lies the problem. Shawcross has always been borderline dirty and very reckless. just look to last year Arsenal match, when he tackled Adebayor, from behind, took out his ankle, and the ball was already out of touch before he slid in!. Not to mention the TWO legs shawcross has broken now. he's a wild man
Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 2213
Loc: New York, NY
Offline
And William Gallas is not dirty? Anyway different story dat. I still think you are missing it, Shawcross DID NOT 'intended to make contact with the player so he "knew he was there"' as you put it, he was trying to get the ball. Full stop. Period.
I completely disagree about Stoke and Bolton and Hull being dirty or over physical. There may be one or two players that are reckless but to call Stoke, Bolton or Hull dirty or over physical is not right in my opinion. I doubt you watch any Stoke, Bolton or Hull games. I think you going off the opinion of what is constantly written in the papers and media.
Thankfully enough i don't read the papers. The media is garbage, if i followed it i would be saying hull,stoke, bolton played fair lovely football. But seeing as i actually watch them regularly hack players i know better. Those side (hull the least of them) are rugby sides.
Shawcross,is nothing but a dirty player. Always has been and always will be. Why would u tackle sum1 from behind and put them out for a month when the ball has already gone out of play? Why would you swining at a man's leg from behind when theres no chance of u getting the ball?..Fair enough if you believe he didnt mean to make contact with Ramsey for that incident. He still lunged in like a jackass and swang wildly and managed to go 5 inches higher than where the ball wud be into the middle of his leg ye. But thats your opinion on the matter. My opinion is, he wanted to get the ball and the man. Becuz ive seen him do this more than enough to see how he plays.
There maybe one or two on stoke who arent reckless. Coyle is slowing trying to change the style of Bolton (i think bibi will reap rewards from this)
Pointless debate none the less. Interesting views from all involved, i dont post here as much as i would like but when i do i always find a good football discussion
cmon technic...Everyone knows shawcross is from the school of get the ball or get the man or both...
I rate Shawcross but I do believe he didn't intend to break Ramses legs but he did intend to make Ramsey know he was here. The shock of the break and all dat mess him up now... till him start bawl... Havn't seen him lately... head nuh good...
_________________________
They make the world so hard
Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 2213
Loc: New York, NY
Offline
Fair enough jt & jagunner. we can agree to disagree and as I have argued on another thread, we cannot know anyone's intent but we can see the act. jt, the reason you haven't seen him lately is because he has to serve a three match suspension for the red.
last thing on Stoke, as you can tell I am kind of partial to them as I have been paying attention to them since Fuller has been there. If you look at their first team squad this year you will find players like Fuller, Matthew Etherington (who some have been calling for Capello to include into the England setup as one of the few good left footed English players), Tucay, Lawrence, Glen Whelan. These are decent to good players with very good technical ability. Sure they can't walk into an arsenal side or a man utd. side, but they are getting better (Stoke) as they establish themselves into the premier league.
It just seems sometimes that fans and the establishment don't want to see anyone else get some success and dismiss them as some little team with no business mixing it up with the elite. This should sound familiar to us fans of a small Caribbean team who that Italian idiot said we had no business being in a World Cup after we qualified for France 98.
Respect jagunner. As Technic says we can agree to disagree and we also have a soft spot for Stoke because of Fuller and I for one have always liked Tuncay. It's an interesting point by Technic at the end about the establishment and this is something I have noticed with Wenger always having a go at small clubs and it's not for dirty play all the time sometimes it's for defensive play another time he talked down one of the smaller clubs saying that a Carling Cup winner shouldn't be in Europe. It's interesting that Fergie always speaks well of the small clubs, perhaps it's for the same pro-British manager argument and agenda to avoid be the EPL being taken over completely by foreign managers. But I did notice that on the last day of the season when Man U beat Hull how Fergie stood alongside Brown, the Hull manager well after the final whistle and waited for confirmation that Newcastle had lost thus meaning Hull stayed in the EPL and Newcastle was relegated instead....he shook Brown's hand and congratulated him and went off to the Man U dressing room. Would Wenger make such a gesture? Would he even care?
. I'd also like to see the full context of Fuller's comments because taken just as is it shown it does look bad. But on the other hand the same way Pulis was upset at the accusations thrown at his player so could Fuller be because I thought Wenger went too far. You can understand Wenger venting in the moment but the statement above showed that after some time to reflect he again has accused Shawcross of intent to hurt Ramsey and not negligence. So in the same way Wenger reacts with a harsh quote when his players get accused of things I'd like to know if it's a reaction from Fuller or if he as a beaten up striker who plays pretty ball is really supporting that idea of defenders hacking forwards down. Now that would be ironic wouldn't it?
