Ramsey

villanfromluton wrote:

Football is a contact sport and there will be injuries

One might think that you really are a tool lutes.

Following in the steps of Jesus, I'd say.

JPR & Lutes

both missing the point fella's....

The Premiership suffers more breakages than any other league virtually in the world.....Jak & Lion tell me I'm wrong in what I'm about to say, your both abroad.

In the Premiership a player is allowed to tackle with foot of floor, therefore a tackle good or bad is at the judgement of the ref to determine offence and the ability of the player to get away with a wayward tackle, once a player lifts his foot and show studs the opposition player is at risk..............its as simple as that, anywhere else in the world it is NOT allowed.

In Italy if a player goes into a tackle raising his foot of the floor its a sending of offence, Lion you watch Portuguese football, how many breakages are you aware of each season, how many times do you see a player go in shin pad high on another.....i'll answer that....you don't.........Jak same.....

The difference here is that you have certain teams set up such as Stoke where players are encouraged to tackle high because the basics are allowed. Wenger sets up Arsenal to play in a European way, wanting the same kind of protection as our Eurpoean counterparts, but then gets dished up with hard fast out of control (sometimes) British Premiership football.

In other words he puts his players in harms way, not deliberately its just the way Arseanl play and just the way the Premiership is.

When you have a league like the Premiership where games are played at blistering pace and tackles go in at speed and foot of floor, you will get breakages.

Italian, Dutch French, Spanish, Portuguese are more deliberate slower almost non-contact sports as we would recognise contact sports in a football sense,

Its got nothing to do with vendettas or agenda, it comes down to the plain simple fact of how we play our football, World Cup referees have already been put on notice to watch the way England players tackle and to not be tolerant.

jpr60 wrote:

villanfromluton wrote:

Football is a contact sport and there will be injuries

One might think that you really are a tool lutes.

Perhaps so, one might also thing that Wenger was a tool with the comments he said. Everyone in football has said the same thing, it was an accident. That dont help Ramsey and certainly feel for him, but it happens. As Finn said earlier in this thread, Gordon Cowans suffered a terrible injury in a pre season friendly and that was awful challenge. The tackle by Ridgewell on Saturday was worse than Shawcross'

Luton:

If what i said in the previous post wasn't clear, watch Shawcross going into Ramsey......you will see his foot of the floor by about 12 inches, had the injury not have occured would the Ref have punished him....probably not....at best a yellow card....in the rest of Europe a player must tackle with his boot on the floor, if its raised its a sending of offence, simple as that, as with the rest of Europe we would not get anything like the breakages we do if players knew they had to tackle....with boot on the floor

As with the explanation of the Vidic Gabby clash, ( which the Ref's are now saying was a good decision) Ref's simply must get a better hold of the job they are doing in the Premiership.

I also firmly believe that being in control means you don't over-commit yourself in a panic tackle. The best English defender I've ever seen, Bobby Moore was always in control. He didn't go crashing into players - he rarely went down at all but if and when he did he was up again, with the ball. It's about timing, positioning but above all it's about knowing what you're doing. That Shawcross tackle had desperation written all over it and had there been any thought on the player's part, which there clearly wasn't, it would have been something like "Phuck, I've lost the ball, I'll dive in and try to get it back but, in the worst case I'll get the man".
What I'm saying is someone should have a word with Shawcross and players like him, get them to react to situations in a calm, controlled way so that they don't over-commit themselves to impossible challenges. If Shawcross stayed on his feet he could have covered back and tried an interception later - if he hadn't caught Ramsey he'd have been on his arse with Arsenal on the attack.
It's pretty basic stuff that you teach kids coming along in the game but here we have a full-time pro who runs around diving into tackles and commiting himself all over the park. I recall the commentary when Shawcross caught Adebayor off the ball (and off the pitch) last year : "Shawcross showing that he has little respect for reputations", said in a "proud to be British" sought of way, "Look, that young lad likes to get stuck in" instead of "If he carries on like that he'll break someone's leg" or "he'll be sent off" which would be far more appropriate IMO.

jpr60 wrote:I also firmly believe that being in control means you don't over-commit yourself in a panic tackle. The best English defender I've ever seen, Bobby Moore was always in control. He didn't go crashing into players - he rarely went down at all but if and when he did he was up again, with the ball. It's about timing, positioning but above all it's about knowing what you're doing. That Shawcross tackle had desperation written all over it and had there been any thought on the player's part, which there clearly wasn't, it would have been something like "Phuck, I've lost the ball, I'll dive in and try to get it back but, in the worst case I'll get the man".
What I'm saying is someone should have a word with Shawcross and players like him, get them to react to situations in a calm, controlled way so that they don't over-commit themselves to impossible challenges. If Shawcross stayed on his feet he could have covered back and tried an interception later - if he hadn't caught Ramsey he'd have been on his arse with Arsenal on the attack.
It's pretty basic stuff that you teach kids coming along in the game but here we have a full-time pro who runs around diving into tackles and committing himself all over the park. I recall the commentary when Shawcross caught Adebayor off the ball (and off the pitch) last year : "Shawcross showing that he has little respect for reputations", said in a "proud to be British" sought of way, "Look, that young lad likes to get stuck in" instead of "If he carries on like that he'll break some one's leg" or "he'll be sent off" which would be far more appropriate IMO.

Jpr: Completely agree about Moore, a fine defender who's timing even today has never been equalled, the other point Jpr I make are the rules, its the rules of the game and players are not allowed to dictate or interpret the rules as they see fit, the problem is those rules have to be enforced on the field of play consistently without any variation, don't take my word for it, next time you watch...example..and Italian game, the player with the ball gets tackled by the opposing player, you will see the opposing players foot on the floor when he makes contact with the ball or its a yellow card and in some cases a sending of offence, there's no interpretation of that or how good a player is, its the rules.

The problem here is that Ref's do not stamp there authority on the game, leaving many grey area's for ill disciplined players to argue etc. When Shawcross made his tackle v Ramsey as he slide in his foot was raised, he made a certain contact with Ramsey that unfortunately resulted in injury, first thing everybody here Say's " No malice", " Was not Dirty" Unfortunate, all these comments, that's because players are used to it here, if that where abroad Shawcross would be labeled a dirty b'stard and be banned for months, because they implement the rules.

Lets face it Jpr, common sense tell you is you are going to tackle a bloke and your going in there commited and you foot is of the floor, you don't make conatct with the ball you make contact with the player chances are you will injure him, that to me is as plain as day.

We don't interpreter the rules properly and never have, Sunday....League Cup final, Agbonlahor moves ahead of Vidic going towards gaol, Vidic brings him down...Penalty, everybody says..Sending of offence, Ref says no....Martin O'Neill says universally excepted that would be a sending of offence, fergie says, sending of offence, i thought the same naturally

Chairman of the Refs association says today......Not sending of offence because at the point Vidic brought down Gabby, Gabby's back was turning away from goal, therefore he did not have a direct line to goal and to score.....job done. So why did every other person in the game think it was a sending of offence when the rule as now put and looking at it clearly wasn't a sending of offence, Gabby did have his back to goal when Vidic fouled him, The Ref was bang on.....problem is given that same foul with pretty much any other Ref and he would have awarded a sending of...........That's the problem here and that's the problem with players like Shawcross and Stoke who feel there is just that bit they can get away with..Grey Area.

Stuff happens in football, players get injured and reckless challenges are made

This is a comment I entirely agree with and have been saying throughout this thread. Do you recall making this comment JPR, when discussing the Gallas challenge v Bolton? See it's not just the non sky 4 teams that make bad challenges. You may point to Shawcross being a serial offender, what about Gallas tackle and kick out at Nani in FA Cup game a while back. So therefore, we are not that far apart after all, are we

villanfromluton wrote:Stuff happens in football, players get injured and reckless challenges are made

This is a comment I entirely agree with and have been saying throughout this thread. Do you recall making this comment JPR, when discussing the Gallas challenge v Bolton? See it's not just the non sky 4 teams that make bad challenges. You may point to Shawcross being a serial offender, what about Gallas tackle and kick out at Nani in FA Cup game a while back. So therefore, we are not that far apart after all, are we

Are you trying to make Jpr leave these boards too!!

villanfromluton wrote:Stuff happens in football, players get injured and reckless challenges are made

This is a comment I entirely agree with and have been saying throughout this thread. Do you recall making this comment JPR, when discussing the Gallas challenge v Bolton? See it's not just the non sky 4 teams that make bad challenges. You may point to Shawcross being a serial offender, what about Gallas tackle and kick out at Nani in FA Cup game a while back. So therefore, we are not that far apart after all, are we

As you will be aware I've not made any comments as to the teams who may or may not be guilty of over-zealous challenges, or coaches who might encourage such play (I think it's pretty obvious to those of us who follow football) and I don't really believe in the so-called 'Sky 4' group, although there are 6 to 8 teams who appear to be better than the rest in the Prem League.
Shawcross does, indeed appear to be a 'serial offender' (your description - I'd prefer to say he seems to lose his head under certain no-win circumstances) and I would never say that Gallas is always under control if I were to compare him to, say Thomas Vermaelen. Yes, stuff happens in football but I've been watching long enough to know that three bad breaks due to 'clumsy' challenges in four years is a pretty high rate to put down to coincidence. I've seen some serious hard bästärds playing football over the years but, hard as they were they rarely dished out broken legs.
So, I'd prefer to see players playing controlled football, not lunging about all over the shop crippling people (or not) and I believe it would be better for football, at any level, if coaches reigned-in the red-mist types so that their play might contibute to the spectacle of football, rather than destroy it.

jpr60 wrote:

villanfromluton wrote:Stuff happens in football, players get injured and reckless challenges are made

This is a comment I entirely agree with and have been saying throughout this thread. Do you recall making this comment JPR, when discussing the Gallas challenge v Bolton? See it's not just the non sky 4 teams that make bad challenges. You may point to Shawcross being a serial offender, what about Gallas tackle and kick out at Nani in FA Cup game a while back. So therefore, we are not that far apart after all, are we

As you will be aware I've not made any comments as to the teams who may or may not be guilty of over-zealous challenges, or coaches who might encourage such play (I think it's pretty obvious to those of us who follow football) and I don't really believe in the so-called 'Sky 4' group, although there are 6 to 8 teams who appear to be better than the rest in the Prem League.

Shawcross does, indeed appear to be a 'serial offender' (your description - I'd prefer to say he seems to lose his head under certain no-win circumstances) and I would never say that Gallas is always under control if I were to compare him to, say Thomas Vermaelen. Yes, stuff happens in football but I've been watching long enough to know that three bad breaks due to 'clumsy' challenges in four years is a pretty high rate to put down to coincidence. I've seen some serious hard bästärds playing football over the years but, hard as they were they rarely dished out broken legs.
So, I'd prefer to see players playing controlled football, not lunging about all over the shop crippling people (or not) and I believe it would be better for football, at any level, if coaches reigned-in the red-mist types so that their play might contibute to the spectacle of football, rather than destroy it.

As Beds said, two of their players have suffered bad injuries in two years. However, think we both agree that clumsy challenges happen from all teams.

I think the difference is, they aren't Arsenal players, who get picked out for rough treatment....

Which I'm sure will be a comfort to Dean Ashton as he looks for a new career at the age of 26.

Arsenal aren't even the most fouled team in the Premiership.

Bedshammer wrote:I think the difference is, they aren't Arsenal players, who get picked out for rough treatment....

Which I'm sure will be a comfort to Dean Ashton as he looks for a new career at the age of 26.

I think this certainly is not only about Arsenal players. It's about the mentality of certain PL coaches who send their teams out to kick the shit out of players who 'don't like it up 'em'. These players tend to be the more skilful and hence the most dangerous. I don't think anyone who follows football would deny that this mentality exists.

jak wrote:

Bedshammer wrote:I think the difference is, they aren't Arsenal players, who get picked out for rough treatment....

Which I'm sure will be a comfort to Dean Ashton as he looks for a new career at the age of 26.

I think this certainly is not only about Arsenal players. It's about the mentality of certain PL coaches who send their teams out to kick the shit out of players who 'don't like it up 'em'. These players tend to be the more skilful and hence the most dangerous. I don't think anyone who follows football would deny that this mentality exists.

Wenger said he thinks it is, and jpr seems to agree with him, which is why I mentioned Ashton & Dyer.

jak wrote:

Bedshammer wrote:I think the difference is, they aren't Arsenal players, who get picked out for rough treatment....

Which I'm sure will be a comfort to Dean Ashton as he looks for a new career at the age of 26.

I think this certainly is not only about Arsenal players. It's about the mentality of certain PL coaches who send their teams out to kick the shit out of players who 'don't like it up 'em'. These players tend to be the more skilful and hence the most dangerous. I don't think anyone who follows football would deny that this mentality exists.

You have a fair point there jak and I think the tackle Ridgewell put in on Walcott earlier in the season would be the perfect example of this.Shawcross on Ramsey was IMO an accident