Arsenal Vs Tottenham: Match Thread

[buttons]

Good performance after a tough week. Draw probably fair but we could have won it!

Eriksen's miss really sticks in the mind - I suspect that sort of miss is exactly the reason he'll be with us for ever more, rather than moving on to one of the super clubs. Has to be more clinical.

 

[Ionman34]

If those Arsenal players in offside positions aren't there Wimmer can leave the ball and it safely goes through to Lloris. Wimmer has to go for it because the linesman wrongly doesn't flag, therefore they have affected the play whilst being offside. Webb is talking out of his arse as if he didn't read the offside rule update.

I don't know how many times I have to say this, I agree. However, the ruling does not, read it and you'll see what I mean. It's a shit rule because it's incomplete and doesn't allow for exactly this variable.
But it is the rule, so the ref called it right by the law of the game, however dumb the ruling may be.

 

[Sweetsman]

I thought that as soon as I saw it - was hoping for Kane to finish the interview by back-handing that little drawn-on-beard smirking prick through the advertising wall.

Are we talking about the one from Southampton whose career came to a halt? Unlike the one who came to us and has just signed a spanking new contract at Real.

 

[Ionman34]

If he was right, he'd be able to prove it without using a straw man.

Now, if we're going to look at this as law, whenever the law is unclear or in a gray area we have to refer to what is known as a precedent, if a ruling has been made previously in a case such as this and the law hasn't been changed or clarified, that is the position we have to assume when making a decision.

Now the fact that absolutely everyone in the panel, at home and career football journalists all are confused as to this ruling makes it absolutely perfectly clear that the precedent has not been followed and that this ruling is inconsistent with what we should expect from the judiciary system.

What precedent? A precedent is only set of the same has happened before and a ruling made.
To my knowledge this set of circumstances haven't occurred before so no precedent.
And to compare to the judiciary? Since when does a referee get the opportunity to weigh up all previous evidence and make a ruling? He has a law which limits his ability to interpret as it clearly states the player has to impede ability to play the ball or his vision.

Take it up with FIFA, I've had enough of explaining that it's clear but flawed.

 

[Gbspurs]

Just watched the match.

Thought we started well considering the change in formation and Dembele and Eriksen were both finding good space and the formation really suited them. If it wasn't for some ring rust from Kane and poor decision making from Son we might have taken the lead.

Arsenal grew into the first half and had the best chances though but despite that I think the half was defined by 2 poor decisions against us. 1) the lack of free-kick given for when Eriksen was fouled near the edge of the box and 2) I don't care what Webbhead says the Arsenal goal was offside. If the rules say otherwise then the rules need changing

2nd half the penalty was good fortune despite being a stone wall penalty just down to how much of a stupid challenge it was.

It ended a bit of a frustrating experience and i was pulling my hair out when Son jumped over Cech instead of absolutely clattering him. That sort of softness will cost us.

I'm not one to bash players but Janssen was shocking when he came on. Terrible first touch, awful postioning, constantly offside, not strong enough holding up and poor laying off and not clinical enough. Worrying really as I felt the game was well set up for him when Kane came off.

Anyway onwards and upwards. Now to get back into winning way against the spam, hopefully with a few injured players back.

 

[slartibartfast]

Just want to mention, how fkin dog shit was oxide chamberlin. Jeez he was shite. Brilliant lol

 

[Lemon]

The most important moment was when Dier let a cross slip under his outstretched leg, giving (I think) Giroud a chance at close range, and Lloris pounced like a panther to deflect it behind. He also came off his line numerous times to sweep up, and always gave our defenders an option when they were under pressure.

Like a panther, love it, love Hugo.

 

[Sweetsman]

Not sure that will be significant enough, but every little helps

They're quite crucial to the working of their respective teams. They provide the speed and guile that pulls people out of position and creates gaps. We have those players, but some are lacking in confidence at the moment. We are handily placed at the moment.

 

[Sweetsman]

What precedent? A precedent is only set of the same has happened before and a ruling made.
To my knowledge this set of circumstances haven't occurred before so no precedent.
And to compare to the judiciary? Since when does a referee get the opportunity to weigh up all previous evidence and make a ruling? He has a law which limits his ability to interpret as it clearly states the player has to impede ability to play the ball or his vision.

Take it up with FIFA, I've had enough of explaining that it's clear but flawed.

You have done your job. Now, you may rest.

 

[slartibartfast]

At the same token we have conceded half as many goals. It's just as likely the highest scoring team wins the prem as it is the team than concedes the fewest.

Spurs winning the league by having the best defensive record that season would baffle the fk out of football followers everywhere for decades to come lol.

 

[Sweetsman]

I don't know how many times I have to say this, I agree. However, the ruling does not, read it and you'll see what I mean. It's a shit rule because it's incomplete and doesn't allow for exactly this variable.
But it is the rule, so the ref called it right by the law of the game, however dumb the ruling may be.

Actually, can you go through that again? This time, can we say that the referee was an enemy of the people?

 

[LeSoupeKitchen]

Just want to mention, how fkin dog shit was oxide chamberlin. Jeez he was shite. Brilliant lol

Agreed. He should have been booked for crimes against football let alone the multitude of fouls he commited.

 

[waresy]

Just want to mention, how fkin dog shit was oxide chamberlin. Jeez he was shite. Brilliant lol

Quite a few nice fouls and poor touches.

His mum was my physio after back surgery a couple of years ago. made sure I had my shirt on everytime I had an appointment

His younger brother is in the Pompey academy and is supposed to be half decent

 

[Sweetsman]

What precedent? A precedent is only set of the same has happened before and a ruling made.
To my knowledge this set of circumstances haven't occurred before so no precedent.
And to compare to the judiciary? Since when does a referee get the opportunity to weigh up all previous evidence and make a ruling? He has a law which limits his ability to interpret as it clearly states the player has to impede ability to play the ball or his vision.

Take it up with FIFA, I've had enough of explaining that it's clear but flawed.

You may or may not want to read the piece in the Daily Telegraph by Keith Hackett.

 

[Sweetsman]

Excellent tactics and in-game by our esteemed manager.

 

[King of Otters]

Oye, what's all that being interviewed with their players all about??? Fucking joke.

nld has got really tame.

I think it's tame today largely because Arsenal have become a soulless husk of a football club.

For all their online presence, their Facebook likes and Twitter followers, the actual stadium itself is completely flat - NLD or not.

 

[Ionman34]

You may or may not want to read the piece in the Daily Telegraph by Keith Hackett.

Interesting opinion, but an opinion nonetheless. It highlights the flaw in the ruling really as opinion from both sides of the argument can be seen as correct.

 

[nightgoat]

I don't know how many times I have to say this, I agree. However, the ruling does not, read it and you'll see what I mean. It's a shit rule because it's incomplete and doesn't allow for exactly this variable.
But it is the rule, so the ref called it right by the law of the game, however dumb the ruling may be.

The line before the one you're citing says a player is penalised by "clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent"

The Arsenal player challenges for the header - 'clearly attempting to play a ball' - which means Wimmer has to as well. It was offside by the written law.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

Nothing new here but always worth mentioning - their fans are the worst in the whole Football League.

Absolutely no noise except howls of derision every time a decision went against them, no songs, and barely even a peep of the division's worst chant "Arsenal" (how very original).

All I could hear in terms of fans were our lot. 57,000 of those absolute melt ****s and you couldn't hear a thing at home against their biggest rivals. Wankers.

That'll be us in a couple of years, Rodney...

 

[riggi]

I think it's tame today largely because Arsenal have become a soulless husk of a football club.

For all their online presence, their Facebook likes and Twitter followers, the actual stadium itself is completely flat - NLD or not.

Unfortunately I've never been