Jimothy Posted 7 October 2012 Posted 7 October 2012 Must have been posting it to myself a couple of hours ago! Anyway just to balance things out though I've seen the Huth stamp I mentioned earlier. He didn't even get a yellow for this, in fact judging by the time in the clock and looking at the BBC's text commentary it wasn't even given as a foul and might have been given as a foul to Stoke. It's a joke players can get away with dangerous play like this just because Suarez takes a few easy tumbles
Jimothy Posted 7 October 2012 Posted 7 October 2012 Bale's at it too. Not sure who's worse, him or Suarez
Soar Fox Posted 7 October 2012 Posted 7 October 2012 I've just saw Gareth Bale's on MOTD and what I don't understand is why did he need to do it? He was going to get the ball before the keeper and looked like he would have had an open goal. The only thing I can think of is that he wanted to get the keeper sent off. I doubt the FA will do do anything but I would like to see players get punished for diving especially when it's that blatant. Doubt they will do anything about it they are probably looking at another rule regarding the colouring of the players tape.
ScouseFox Posted 7 October 2012 Posted 7 October 2012 The worst thing about that MOTD coverage of it was that Mark Lawrenson said Bale's dive was "the funny side of the game". What a bellend. Both Lawro and Bale.
Guest shearfox Posted 7 October 2012 Posted 7 October 2012 The worst thing about that MOTD coverage of it was that Mark Lawrenson said Bale's dive was "the funny side of the game". What a bellend. Both Lawro and Bale. Agree, I don't know what is funny about blatant cheating that could result in another player getting sent off.
Soar Fox Posted 7 October 2012 Posted 7 October 2012 It's not funny at all it's blatant cheating. It's like when commentators laugh at Paul Scholes challenges. It's lucky that he's not seriously injured someone over the years.
Haydos Posted 7 October 2012 Posted 7 October 2012 I've just saw Gareth Bale's on MOTD and what I don't understand is why did he need to do it? He was going to get the ball before the keeper and looked like he would have had an open goal. The only thing I can think of is that he wanted to get the keeper sent off. I doubt the FA will do do anything but I would like to see players get punished for diving especially when it's that blatant. Doubt they will do anything about it they are probably looking at another rule regarding the colouring of the players tape. Isn't he running well wide of the goal?
Bert Posted 7 October 2012 Posted 7 October 2012 I've just saw Gareth Bale's on MOTD and what I don't understand is why did he need to do it? He was going to get the ball before the keeper and looked like he would have had an open goal. The only thing I can think of is that he wanted to get the keeper sent off. I doubt the FA will do do anything but I would like to see players get punished for diving especially when it's that blatant. Doubt they will do anything about it they are probably looking at another rule regarding the colouring of the players tape. Looks to me that he was anticipating the keeper going for the ball rather than pulling out of it. Very sneaky but he got shown up to be the cheat he is.
martyn Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 I dislike Tony Pulis immensely. Only too quick to call for a ban for Suarez yet only a few weeks ago he was praising Peter Crouch for getting a way with handball to set up his goal against Manchester City, using the "we're a small club and never get decisions" pretext.
Fox92 Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 I dislike Tony Pulis immensely. Only too quick to call for a ban for Suarez yet only a few weeks ago he was praising Peter Crouch for getting a way with handball to set up his goal against Manchester City, using the "we're a small club and never get decisions" pretext. I don't like him, his cap, his long-ball tactics, Stoke and their fans. It just annoys me seeing him in that cap when it isn't even sunny.
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 I don't like him, his cap, his long-ball tactics, Stoke and their fans. It just annoys me seeing him in that cap when it isn't even sunny. For once can't agree with you there. Long ball arguing is very pointless, teams can play how they want and its up to others to counter or better it. I'm not saying i like 'long ball' football, but if it is the most effective way of playing for a team then so be it. I think its almost childish for other fans of a team who cant beat Stoke to then revert to 'long ball' comments, so what if they do play that way? Get over it. If Stoke tried playing like Barcelona they'd probably get relegated. I think after the top 4 or 6 clubs most teams dread Stoke away thje most. Because they are going to be in a battle and not many teams take 3 points away from Stoke there. You can only play foootball with the players you have got, and in some ways I think Stoke are no less long ball than they were. Having players like Adam, Etherington, and even Owen to an extent. Ridiculing them for putting balls into the box is a bit supid. Its a way of scoring they all count, thats why they are most likely to be a safe mid table team agaain this year. I'd have loved to have been like them and played apparent long ball but become a real solid Premier team. I'd rather play like Arsenal but do Stoke fans care? No. I am not a big fan of their fans though, i agree with that. They say what great support they have, being loud, etc etc. But I remember the season before we went down in 2007,when we lost 4-2, they were just outside the PO's about March time, and they only got 13k, and the atmosphere was shocking. So for their fans and neutrals to say what support they have alwasy had is a bit beyond me.
Corky Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 The worst thing about that MOTD coverage of it was that Mark Lawrenson said Bale's dive was "the funny side of the game". What a bellend. Both Lawro and Bale. Bang on.
RobHawk Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 I don't like him, his cap, his long-ball tactics, Stoke and their fans. It just annoys me seeing him in that cap when it isn't even sunny. Great song about him though
Kitchandro Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 For once can't agree with you there. Long ball arguing is very pointless, teams can play how they want and its up to others to counter or better it. I'm not saying i like 'long ball' football, but if it is the most effective way of playing for a team then so be it. I think its almost childish for other fans of a team who cant beat Stoke to then revert to 'long ball' comments, so what if they do play that way? Get over it. If Stoke tried playing like Barcelona they'd probably get relegated. I think after the top 4 or 6 clubs most teams dread Stoke away thje most. Because they are going to be in a battle and not many teams take 3 points away from Stoke there. You can only play foootball with the players you have got, and in some ways I think Stoke are no less long ball than they were. Having players like Adam, Etherington, and even Owen to an extent. Ridiculing them for putting balls into the box is a bit supid. Its a way of scoring they all count, thats why they are most likely to be a safe mid table team agaain this year. I'd have loved to have been like them and played apparent long ball but become a real solid Premier team. I'd rather play like Arsenal but do Stoke fans care? No. I am not a big fan of their fans though, i agree with that. They say what great support they have, being loud, etc etc. But I remember the season before we went down in 2007,when we lost 4-2, they were just outside the PO's about March time, and they only got 13k, and the atmosphere was shocking. So for their fans and neutrals to say what support they have alwasy had is a bit beyond me. But this is all bollocks. They finish in the bottom half every year. Look at Swansea last season, finished 3 places above them by playing entertaining, attacking football. Fulham also played good footy and finished 7th. You say playing the long ball is effective but they don't score many goals, and I doubt they create many chances from open play. They could easily mix it up a bit and combine their physicality with some quality, but they don't. Stoke aren't a big club but they're not the smallest in the division, yet several clubs finish above them by playing better football. I don't care what anyone says, I'd hate to support Stoke, Premiership or not, I don't want to watch boring, turgid football week after week and sign lanky uninspiring players because our manager can't be arsed to try and play some decent football. They're a dirty, horriblee team and a stain on the Premiership. There's nothing wrong with being physical and solid at the back. There's also nothing wrong with consolidating after you've first gone up. If Pulis had them playing this way for one or two seasons I could understand it. But he continues to get them to play the same way with no intention of developing. They'll always be a pointless, bottom half club if they play this way - eventually good football profits because it is more effective. It annoys me when people slate Pearson for the way he plays. At first we were direct and could be really boring in some games. But by the end of the play-off season we were playing some very nice football - we were scoring goals, good goals - we were passing the ball, we were playing at a good tempo - whilst still keeping our steel and discipline. The same is happening now. Pulis, however, is just a small time, small minded leader of thugs. There's nothing wrong with their league finishes really, but they're the anti-football. And to echo what Martyn said, he is a two-faced gimp.
Corky Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 How did Huth get away with that on Suarez? What possible basis is there?
Super_horns Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 Quite strange when you consider what we had our guy sent off for on Saturday! Mind you we aren't a Premiership side...same with the diving of Bale and Suarez..not a yellow card in sight for them.
Haydos Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 How did Huth get away with that on Suarez? What possible basis is there? He barely touched him? Didn't put any weight on him at all? It wasn't a stamp?
Kitchandro Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 He barely touched him? Didn't put any weight on him at all? It wasn't a stamp? Are you kidding? He clearly went for him on purpose and left a mark on his chest. Looks a pretty clear stamp to me.
Corky Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 He barely touched him? Didn't put any weight on him at all? It wasn't a stamp? The amount of contact doesn't always count, as intent is used fairly often. It was a stamp, there was no need for him to put his foot on Suarez's chest.
ScouseFox Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 Great Stoke stat from the weekend was that their most successful passing combination with 8 (yes, just 8) successful passes in 90 minutes was between their goalkeeper and Crouch. Hoooof.
Haydos Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 The amount of contact doesn't always count, as intent is used fairly often. It was a stamp, there was no need for him to put his foot on Suarez's chest. It looked unnecessary but at the end of the day there's nothing much in it to get up in arms about. A warning regarding future conduct and a fine/1 game ban tops for me. I was playing men's rugby at 17 and the amount of times i've been kicked, (actually) stamped on, raked, punched...lets just say I'm sick of footballers acting like ***** all the time. I'm not condoning what Huth did, he shouldn't have put his foot there, but the truth is he barely touched him. Have a word and move on. By the way, this is a stamp at 2.45...
Fox in the North Posted 8 October 2012 Posted 8 October 2012 Yes I'd agree with you haydos after playing plenty of rugby myself. That's what I'd call a stamp.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.