Seeing as we're discussing what I'm supposed to be doing or not doing, my opinion is fact as only I know if I'm being condescending or not
And again, you're showing you don't know the laws of the game to the extent I'm starting to think you're telling lies about going on a refereeing course. Go to the link and read the laws, they clearly distinguish between reckless challenges and challenges with excessive force. For somebody that's supposed to have gone on a refereeing course you should know they're differentiated.
And the final word isn't important to me but I'll keep pulling you up every time you post factually incorrect info and try to blag your way out of it by lying about going on a referring course.
What an absolutely appalling performance from Arsenal. First half was basically a complete waste of 45 minutes, build up slow, 25 passes across the back before a pass forward, wasted passes left, right and centre. Did Fabianski even make a save in that half?
Second half, rubbish finishing when the chances came, again build up far too slow, the likes of Ozil just plodding around the pitch taking 2/3 touches too many. I'm glad Swansea stuck one in, Arsenal might've dominated possession but they deserved to get done.
Oh and I am a liar too in you opinion. Even better. I have not been factually incorrect, but you have now decided to call me for 'blagging'. Rather rich from someone who clearly does not understand the laws of the game or how to interpret them, yet feels imminently qualified to call out others with a different opinion.
You are not pulling me up, you are trying to estbalish your self appointed moral high ground and bully as you do with other posters on here.
I was needed to referee at junior level and so was enrolled on a basic referee course and completed a couple of modules.
For further discussion in the future I held a level two cricket coaching badge before they changed the system and am a qualified ten bowling instructor.
Now quite frankly I couldn't give a monkeys whether or not you believe I have been on a course or not and will not be sinking to your constant trolling.
I think Monk has done a cracking job with Swansea this season. I thought they would struggle at the start but they have played some decent stuff too.
What an absolutely appalling performance from Arsenal. First half was basically a complete waste of 45 minutes, build up slow, 25 passes across the back before a pass forward, wasted passes left, right and centre. Did Fabianski even make a save in that half?
Second half, rubbish finishing when the chances came, again build up far too slow, the likes of Ozil just plodding around the pitch taking 2/3 touches too many. I'm glad Swansea stuck one in, Arsenal might've dominated possession but they deserved to get done.
Shockingly enough it is hard to break down a team that is intent on defending deep and in numbers. Swansea were disciplined and defending well in the first half.
In the second half they started to tire, there was more space available and many more chances were created. "Arsenal deserved to get done" - how do you quantify that? The team that creates more chances, has more of the ball and shows much more attacking intent deserves to lose? What is your theory, how do you arrive at that?
Because their overall mentality to the game wasn't right to win the game. First half, they showed no desire, no fight, nothing. It was a case of 'We show up, we win'. Sure, they pushed on a bit in the second half but did Fabianski make a save that wasn't comfortable?
If you're that lacklustre, and can't break a team down, at home, you deserve to get done.
So much for a team that can "win the EPL next year".
Christ, I was going to reply to this but I think I'll just shake my head, say that I disagree completely but you're entitled to your opinion and just head off to bed.
So much for a team that can "win the EPL next year".