comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by The Godfather (U10154)
posted 26 minutes ago
The consensus is if you're a neutral it's a foul, if you're a Chelsea fan spurs fan or a wenger hating fan looking for an excuse to bash your own team then it wasn't a foul. There are many fans who after initially were brainwashed by the commentary to think it wasnt a foul have had time to reasses and use their own mind
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how the large majority of neutral pundits and journos concluded it was not a foul then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A lot of people have instant reactions because commentry. very few go back to look at it again.
https://twitter.com/7amkickoff/status/827864134444212224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
How is it not a foul from a different angle. Its not a close decision, the ref made a big mistake because he was slow on the play. He looked at his linesman to bail him out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The journos today on Sunday Supp all agreed no foul. That does not mean they are right, but it negates your instant reaction point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really, because I doubt any of them actually looked at it again. (which is what I said) They have a lot to report on and usually never go back on whatever is said instantly by the commentators.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by The Godfather (U10154)
posted 26 minutes ago
The consensus is if you're a neutral it's a foul, if you're a Chelsea fan spurs fan or a wenger hating fan looking for an excuse to bash your own team then it wasn't a foul. There are many fans who after initially were brainwashed by the commentary to think it wasnt a foul have had time to reasses and use their own mind
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how the large majority of neutral pundits and journos concluded it was not a foul then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A lot of people have instant reactions because commentry. very few go back to look at it again.
https://twitter.com/7amkickoff/status/827864134444212224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
How is it not a foul from a different angle. Its not a close decision, the ref made a big mistake because he was slow on the play. He looked at his linesman to bail him out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I initially thought foul but then on replays changed my mind.
Just watched it here again https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjI5YXknGLs
and really don't think Alonso does much wrong.
Don't think it had much impact on the game btw. Chelsea clear and deserved winners.
Bellerin had his arms raised as well, different timing and maybe Alonso could have stopped one!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Foul or not, unfair to call out the ref, he was in a decent position and gave the only decision he could in real time.
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 2 minutes ago
Looked at it again, still not a foul for me, he didn't lead with his elbow, hisarms were still up because he was still ascending and Bellerind weer descending cause he was already starting his descent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 12
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the
ball, threatens injure to someone (including the player themselves) and includes
preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
I would say concussion is a pretty serious injury. Its the very definition of dangerous play.
"It was quite apparent last season as well. But at least the main criticism of him was his inability to maintain passing tempo. If you think back it was the justification given by Wenger of playing Ramsey on right to augment Santi and Coq in the middle. I think this season Coquelin just hasn't kicked on. I agree its somewhat Wenger's fault for playing him in the box to box role to help in the forward press because of Ozil's reluctance to initiate physical contact. However I don't know why he has lost so much power. He was bullied by Dembele that resulted in the pen, lost a very simple challenge with Herrara that allowed the cross for Mata's goal, amongst numerous other times he has been out of position against midfield runners. Been complaining about it for months. I really wish Wenger would see these things a bit earlier. I would be tempted to play the Maitland-Niles/oxo combo at the moment."
I'm not saying he hasn't been bad. Doesn't look as sharp in the tackle and as you say doesn't seem as strong.
Just think there are mitigating factors. He was abysmal for the Hazard goal but the fact he starts behind Hazard, an attacking mid, says it all. He's best as an out and out defensive mid just in front of the defence. I think it's why he works best with Ramsey, who is constantly further up the pitch.
We don't need 6 creative geniuses in the team. Absolutely fine with Coquelin being average at best on the ball.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 2 minutes ago
Looked at it again, still not a foul for me, he didn't lead with his elbow, hisarms were still up because he was still ascending and Bellerind weer descending cause he was already starting his descent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 12
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the
ball, threatens injure to someone (including the player themselves) and includes
preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
I would say concussion is a pretty serious injury. Its the very definition of dangerous play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As i said, injuries can hapPen without there being a foul....Ryan Mason was not fouled by Cahill.
Your interpretation of the rule means no tackling and no heading of the ball in football matches....in other words
YOU ARE TALKIN BOLLOX.
As I said, it's just a case of the widely held sentiment of how Arsenal are weak, spineless and all that, so in a match where we were getting physically bullied at that stage of the game, that challenge only seemed to affirm that widely held perception and all the pundits had a sheep-like reaction trotting out the same points.
Whether it was a foul or not, the seeming unanimous agreement is ridiculous. It was a marginal decision either way.
I was pleasantly surprised by the number of ex-Arsenal players and anti-Chelsea media who concluded it was not a foul. The problem is that Alonso was in, and moving through the air before Bellerin was even off the ground. Bellerin jumped into Alonso. Just because he was physically stronger, higher and travelling faster than Bellerin does not make it a foul. Bellerin was extremely feeble in his effort to win the ball.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by xiuxiuejar (U6109)
posted 33 seconds ago
I was pleasantly surprised by the number of ex-Arsenal players and anti-Chelsea media who concluded it was not a foul. The problem is that Alonso was in, and moving through the air before Bellerin was even off the ground. Bellerin jumped into Alonso. Just because he was physically stronger, higher and travelling faster than Bellerin does not make it a foul. Bellerin was extremely feeble in his effort to win the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's how i see it, but I totally understand how others have an opposing view.
But one thing it most certainly was not is dangerous or reckless play by Alonso
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 22 minutes ago
We certainly do seem to be getting some rough decision against us.
------------
Pretty sure Burnley would disagree. Now shut it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would Burnley disagree? In he first game if that's a clear handball then we should have had 2-3 pens for exactly the same offence. Ie a ball being blasted from a few yards onto a player's hand.
Only luck we got was the Leicester pen not given and maybe the saints pen but that was soft and we seems to be getting loads of soft pens against us.
Chris, How is he the best defensive midfield out there if he caught out positionally? Last season he was constantly putting in last ditch tackles. Now that looks very specular but in reality you do that when you are not in the right position in the first place. I think a lot of us got caught up on how much better he is compared to Arteta and Flamini. But that doesn't mean he is the best defensive midfielder for me. Now I was fan of Coq but really how long do you wait for someone to develop? I was very impressed by Maitland-Niles in the cup games. Sure it is against inferior competition but I really think he may be worth a go now that we have no chance for the title. But Xhaka has to be first choice for me.
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 2 minutes ago
Looked at it again, still not a foul for me, he didn't lead with his elbow, hisarms were still up because he was still ascending and Bellerind weer descending cause he was already starting his descent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 12
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the
ball, threatens injure to someone (including the player themselves) and includes
preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
I would say concussion is a pretty serious injury. Its the very definition of dangerous play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As i said, injuries can hapPen without there being a foul....Ryan Mason was not fouled by Cahill.
Your interpretation of the rule means no tackling and no heading of the ball in football matches....in other words
YOU ARE TALKIN BOLLOX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I remember correctly Cahil missed the ball and got Mason surely that's a clear foul. (can't remember but that's what I think happened ) if not apologies
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 2 minutes ago
Looked at it again, still not a foul for me, he didn't lead with his elbow, hisarms were still up because he was still ascending and Bellerind weer descending cause he was already starting his descent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 12
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the
ball, threatens injure to someone (including the player themselves) and includes
preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
I would say concussion is a pretty serious injury. Its the very definition of dangerous play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As i said, injuries can hapPen without there being a foul....Ryan Mason was not fouled by Cahill.
Your interpretation of the rule means no tackling and no heading of the ball in football matches....in other words
YOU ARE TALKIN BOLLOX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I am not. head vs head injury is not the same thing as jumping, leading with your arm unless you think Cahill was trying to head butt Mason.
When you lead with the arm is always a foul as it was on llorente today. It was exactly the same type of challenge but this time llorente didn't actually catch the player but he was yellow carded anyway because of Law 12.
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by The Godfather (U10154)
posted 26 minutes ago
The consensus is if you're a neutral it's a foul, if you're a Chelsea fan spurs fan or a wenger hating fan looking for an excuse to bash your own team then it wasn't a foul. There are many fans who after initially were brainwashed by the commentary to think it wasnt a foul have had time to reasses and use their own mind
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how the large majority of neutral pundits and journos concluded it was not a foul then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The pundits all became swept up in the wave of Gary and Martins reaction , no one was brave enough stand up and say what it was. Pure example of a group being stuck in a bubble only being influenced by others in the group. Bet some of them went home outside of their bubbles and re evaluated their decision. Henry just didn't want to seem biased and was not strong enough to stand up.
The fact you keep trying to say all the pundits said it was a foul is proof of what I'm saying of you being influenced. The question in the op is whether you personally think it was a foul, why bring pundits opinion? Because they influenced you that's why
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 10 minutes ago
As I said, it's just a case of the widely held sentiment of how Arsenal are weak, spineless and all that, so in a match where we were getting physically bullied at that stage of the game, that challenge only seemed to affirm that widely held perception and all the pundits had a sheep-like reaction trotting out the same points.
Whether it was a foul or not, the seeming unanimous agreement is ridiculous. It was a marginal decision either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Basically, spot on
I have a feeling that one of the pundits on motd2 will be the first to stand up and go against the masses. Is Savage on?
Savage will say black is white to get noticed
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
My immediate thought was a foul would be harsh. But when he jumped his arms stayed level. If he was using them for leverage they would be moving down towards his sides and he would not have caught Bellerin. So I think it was not natural movement and he deliberately used his arms to go into Bellerin first. not maliciously and possibly to protect himself from the inevitable collision, but it was not for leverage as some have said.
The other thing to consider is, if this was an Arsenal player on a Chelsea player I would expect it to be given every time. My biggest complaints are the inconsistency in reffing and the long delay before Atkinson called the medical team on.
Never a foul. Not Alonso's fault that Bellerin jumped so awkwardly.
Sign in if you want to comment
Alonso's goal
Page 4 of 6
6
posted on 5/2/17
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by The Godfather (U10154)
posted 26 minutes ago
The consensus is if you're a neutral it's a foul, if you're a Chelsea fan spurs fan or a wenger hating fan looking for an excuse to bash your own team then it wasn't a foul. There are many fans who after initially were brainwashed by the commentary to think it wasnt a foul have had time to reasses and use their own mind
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how the large majority of neutral pundits and journos concluded it was not a foul then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A lot of people have instant reactions because commentry. very few go back to look at it again.
https://twitter.com/7amkickoff/status/827864134444212224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
How is it not a foul from a different angle. Its not a close decision, the ref made a big mistake because he was slow on the play. He looked at his linesman to bail him out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The journos today on Sunday Supp all agreed no foul. That does not mean they are right, but it negates your instant reaction point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not really, because I doubt any of them actually looked at it again. (which is what I said) They have a lot to report on and usually never go back on whatever is said instantly by the commentators.
posted on 5/2/17
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by The Godfather (U10154)
posted 26 minutes ago
The consensus is if you're a neutral it's a foul, if you're a Chelsea fan spurs fan or a wenger hating fan looking for an excuse to bash your own team then it wasn't a foul. There are many fans who after initially were brainwashed by the commentary to think it wasnt a foul have had time to reasses and use their own mind
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how the large majority of neutral pundits and journos concluded it was not a foul then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A lot of people have instant reactions because commentry. very few go back to look at it again.
https://twitter.com/7amkickoff/status/827864134444212224?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
How is it not a foul from a different angle. Its not a close decision, the ref made a big mistake because he was slow on the play. He looked at his linesman to bail him out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I initially thought foul but then on replays changed my mind.
Just watched it here again https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjI5YXknGLs
and really don't think Alonso does much wrong.
Don't think it had much impact on the game btw. Chelsea clear and deserved winners.
posted on 5/2/17
Bellerin had his arms raised as well, different timing and maybe Alonso could have stopped one!
posted on 5/2/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 5/2/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 5/2/17
Foul or not, unfair to call out the ref, he was in a decent position and gave the only decision he could in real time.
posted on 5/2/17
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 2 minutes ago
Looked at it again, still not a foul for me, he didn't lead with his elbow, hisarms were still up because he was still ascending and Bellerind weer descending cause he was already starting his descent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 12
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the
ball, threatens injure to someone (including the player themselves) and includes
preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
I would say concussion is a pretty serious injury. Its the very definition of dangerous play.
posted on 5/2/17
"It was quite apparent last season as well. But at least the main criticism of him was his inability to maintain passing tempo. If you think back it was the justification given by Wenger of playing Ramsey on right to augment Santi and Coq in the middle. I think this season Coquelin just hasn't kicked on. I agree its somewhat Wenger's fault for playing him in the box to box role to help in the forward press because of Ozil's reluctance to initiate physical contact. However I don't know why he has lost so much power. He was bullied by Dembele that resulted in the pen, lost a very simple challenge with Herrara that allowed the cross for Mata's goal, amongst numerous other times he has been out of position against midfield runners. Been complaining about it for months. I really wish Wenger would see these things a bit earlier. I would be tempted to play the Maitland-Niles/oxo combo at the moment."
I'm not saying he hasn't been bad. Doesn't look as sharp in the tackle and as you say doesn't seem as strong.
Just think there are mitigating factors. He was abysmal for the Hazard goal but the fact he starts behind Hazard, an attacking mid, says it all. He's best as an out and out defensive mid just in front of the defence. I think it's why he works best with Ramsey, who is constantly further up the pitch.
We don't need 6 creative geniuses in the team. Absolutely fine with Coquelin being average at best on the ball.
posted on 5/2/17
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 2 minutes ago
Looked at it again, still not a foul for me, he didn't lead with his elbow, hisarms were still up because he was still ascending and Bellerind weer descending cause he was already starting his descent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 12
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the
ball, threatens injure to someone (including the player themselves) and includes
preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
I would say concussion is a pretty serious injury. Its the very definition of dangerous play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As i said, injuries can hapPen without there being a foul....Ryan Mason was not fouled by Cahill.
Your interpretation of the rule means no tackling and no heading of the ball in football matches....in other words
YOU ARE TALKIN BOLLOX.
posted on 5/2/17
As I said, it's just a case of the widely held sentiment of how Arsenal are weak, spineless and all that, so in a match where we were getting physically bullied at that stage of the game, that challenge only seemed to affirm that widely held perception and all the pundits had a sheep-like reaction trotting out the same points.
Whether it was a foul or not, the seeming unanimous agreement is ridiculous. It was a marginal decision either way.
posted on 5/2/17
I was pleasantly surprised by the number of ex-Arsenal players and anti-Chelsea media who concluded it was not a foul. The problem is that Alonso was in, and moving through the air before Bellerin was even off the ground. Bellerin jumped into Alonso. Just because he was physically stronger, higher and travelling faster than Bellerin does not make it a foul. Bellerin was extremely feeble in his effort to win the ball.
posted on 5/2/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 5/2/17
comment by xiuxiuejar (U6109)
posted 33 seconds ago
I was pleasantly surprised by the number of ex-Arsenal players and anti-Chelsea media who concluded it was not a foul. The problem is that Alonso was in, and moving through the air before Bellerin was even off the ground. Bellerin jumped into Alonso. Just because he was physically stronger, higher and travelling faster than Bellerin does not make it a foul. Bellerin was extremely feeble in his effort to win the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's how i see it, but I totally understand how others have an opposing view.
But one thing it most certainly was not is dangerous or reckless play by Alonso
posted on 5/2/17
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 22 minutes ago
We certainly do seem to be getting some rough decision against us.
------------
Pretty sure Burnley would disagree. Now shut it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would Burnley disagree? In he first game if that's a clear handball then we should have had 2-3 pens for exactly the same offence. Ie a ball being blasted from a few yards onto a player's hand.
Only luck we got was the Leicester pen not given and maybe the saints pen but that was soft and we seems to be getting loads of soft pens against us.
posted on 5/2/17
Chris, How is he the best defensive midfield out there if he caught out positionally? Last season he was constantly putting in last ditch tackles. Now that looks very specular but in reality you do that when you are not in the right position in the first place. I think a lot of us got caught up on how much better he is compared to Arteta and Flamini. But that doesn't mean he is the best defensive midfielder for me. Now I was fan of Coq but really how long do you wait for someone to develop? I was very impressed by Maitland-Niles in the cup games. Sure it is against inferior competition but I really think he may be worth a go now that we have no chance for the title. But Xhaka has to be first choice for me.
posted on 5/2/17
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 2 minutes ago
Looked at it again, still not a foul for me, he didn't lead with his elbow, hisarms were still up because he was still ascending and Bellerind weer descending cause he was already starting his descent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 12
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the
ball, threatens injure to someone (including the player themselves) and includes
preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
I would say concussion is a pretty serious injury. Its the very definition of dangerous play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As i said, injuries can hapPen without there being a foul....Ryan Mason was not fouled by Cahill.
Your interpretation of the rule means no tackling and no heading of the ball in football matches....in other words
YOU ARE TALKIN BOLLOX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I remember correctly Cahil missed the ball and got Mason surely that's a clear foul. (can't remember but that's what I think happened ) if not apologies
posted on 5/2/17
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 2 minutes ago
Looked at it again, still not a foul for me, he didn't lead with his elbow, hisarms were still up because he was still ascending and Bellerind weer descending cause he was already starting his descent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 12
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the
ball, threatens injure to someone (including the player themselves) and includes
preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
I would say concussion is a pretty serious injury. Its the very definition of dangerous play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As i said, injuries can hapPen without there being a foul....Ryan Mason was not fouled by Cahill.
Your interpretation of the rule means no tackling and no heading of the ball in football matches....in other words
YOU ARE TALKIN BOLLOX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I am not. head vs head injury is not the same thing as jumping, leading with your arm unless you think Cahill was trying to head butt Mason.
When you lead with the arm is always a foul as it was on llorente today. It was exactly the same type of challenge but this time llorente didn't actually catch the player but he was yellow carded anyway because of Law 12.
posted on 5/2/17
comment by SWTN Biggish (U7916)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by The Godfather (U10154)
posted 26 minutes ago
The consensus is if you're a neutral it's a foul, if you're a Chelsea fan spurs fan or a wenger hating fan looking for an excuse to bash your own team then it wasn't a foul. There are many fans who after initially were brainwashed by the commentary to think it wasnt a foul have had time to reasses and use their own mind
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how the large majority of neutral pundits and journos concluded it was not a foul then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The pundits all became swept up in the wave of Gary and Martins reaction , no one was brave enough stand up and say what it was. Pure example of a group being stuck in a bubble only being influenced by others in the group. Bet some of them went home outside of their bubbles and re evaluated their decision. Henry just didn't want to seem biased and was not strong enough to stand up.
posted on 5/2/17
The fact you keep trying to say all the pundits said it was a foul is proof of what I'm saying of you being influenced. The question in the op is whether you personally think it was a foul, why bring pundits opinion? Because they influenced you that's why
posted on 5/2/17
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 10 minutes ago
As I said, it's just a case of the widely held sentiment of how Arsenal are weak, spineless and all that, so in a match where we were getting physically bullied at that stage of the game, that challenge only seemed to affirm that widely held perception and all the pundits had a sheep-like reaction trotting out the same points.
Whether it was a foul or not, the seeming unanimous agreement is ridiculous. It was a marginal decision either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Basically, spot on
posted on 5/2/17
I have a feeling that one of the pundits on motd2 will be the first to stand up and go against the masses. Is Savage on?
posted on 5/2/17
Savage will say black is white to get noticed
posted on 5/2/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 5/2/17
My immediate thought was a foul would be harsh. But when he jumped his arms stayed level. If he was using them for leverage they would be moving down towards his sides and he would not have caught Bellerin. So I think it was not natural movement and he deliberately used his arms to go into Bellerin first. not maliciously and possibly to protect himself from the inevitable collision, but it was not for leverage as some have said.
The other thing to consider is, if this was an Arsenal player on a Chelsea player I would expect it to be given every time. My biggest complaints are the inconsistency in reffing and the long delay before Atkinson called the medical team on.
posted on 5/2/17
Never a foul. Not Alonso's fault that Bellerin jumped so awkwardly.
Page 4 of 6
6