**SPOILERS** Football 26th Feb - 2nd Mar 2011
- Thread starter Greenlizard0
- Start date
yes
I didn't see the Utd pen, joined the game a little bit late (only saw Chelsea's disallowed goal by replay). It was 'ok' by current standards, seen worse performances and better ones. Luiz's challenge didn't appear ridiculous to me, he was late, but it was only a body check, see them all the time, wasn't a dangerous or reckless challenge or anything, was never, ever going to cause any real pain. Hernandez was up after a few seconds, just got a bit of a shoulder to the face since he's so small, sure it was sore for a minute.
He did miss a few yellows, but for both teams. In fact, overall, he missed about an equal amount of stuff for both sides, which explains my complete confusion about comments from Man Utd fans about how they were so hard done, when Chelsea had about equal their way
you did leave your best player out (berbatov) and simply lol at your two wrongs do NOT make a right comment.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 3,084
- Location
- London
Chelsea on the ropes? Must have been watching a different game? How many saves did Cech have to make?
"worst officiating i've seen in the history of the premiership".
Oh come don't be so silly.
Cech made far, far fewer saves than VdS. iirc Chelsea had double or triple the amount of attempts Man Utd did
Last edited:
Since when was shots a valid metric for pressure? Arsenal fans above all should know about this more than most, given their penchant for trying to pass the ball actually into the net.
Chelsea were being battered until their equaliser went in. End of. If people can't see that then there really is no hope.
[Edit] Actually, sod this. Can't be bothered to argue it with you lot of trolls. I'm out.
Chelsea were being battered until their equaliser went in. End of. If people can't see that then there really is no hope.
[Edit] Actually, sod this. Can't be bothered to argue it with you lot of trolls. I'm out.
You're mental, were you watching a tape of a different game? The one last night was fairly even. Both sides had periods of domination, Chelsea made theirs count
Shots aren't an accurate measure, but my eyes and brain which processed the game are, the stats only go to back up what almost every non Man Utd fan saw
Shots aren't an accurate measure, but my eyes and brain which processed the game are, the stats only go to back up what almost every non Man Utd fan saw
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 1,698
- Location
- Stockport
I was a Neutral to the the united and chelsea game last night, and i have to say there is a lot of moaning over nothing!
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 3,084
- Location
- London
The problem is your are bringing this on yourself by posting such silly statements such as "worst officiating i've seen in the history of the premiership" and "Chelsea were absolutely on the ropes".
How can you expect to post such things when they are completely false?
Yes there were wrong decisions, though it was a penalty end of story. Chelsea were perhaps under a little pressure for about 10-15 minutes in the entire game. For the rest of the match Chelsea were by far the better team in attack.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Its ONE measure of pressure, dominating in midfield means smeg all, you quite literally can't score without shooting, though that doesn't meant the next 4 shots wouldn't get 4 more goals, but its VERY telling you only had a single shot from in the box and that was from a corner.
Pressure, you had 2 corners, Chelsea had 10, another measure of pressure.
Shots, you had one other shot hit the target other than the goal, Chelsea had 5 others hit the target apart from the goals, they had double the amount of shots total with a higher on target ratio.
By EVERY measure Chelsea had more goal threat, they scored more, they shot more, they had more on target, they forced more corners, Utd had to make almost 50% more clearances, similar number of tackles, Utd had more passing.
By what measure exactly did Utd batter them, posession, boohoo, not by much and by the fact that of 4 shots in the first half where they WERE the better team, 3 shots were from open play, each one was taken roughly 25-30yards from goal, 2 were blocked and Rooney scored. That pretty much says to me there weren't getting anywhere and were being forced to take only long shots and even then were given incredibly few opportunities.
For the record Arsenals last two draws, Newcastle and City, which was a FAR more defensive game than the UTd-Chelsea game, we had 7 of 13 on target against Newcastle and 5 of 15 against City, we somewhat battered City's goal, while they had 5 shots all off target, and we utterly trounced Newcastle in the first half.
If Arsenal battered Newcastle in the first half, and they battered us in the second, you DID NOT batter Chelsea at any stage, 1 goal, 1 other shot on target the whole game, sorry but no, not even close.
I also love that someone said Luiz shouldn't of even been on the pitch for the equaliser, errm, the "sending off" incident with Luiz was after he scored.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
We had less shots on target its true. But that I'd down to Rooney in part as he missed what 3 out of 4 roughly.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 1,807
- Location
- State of Volatile Apathy
Errr... except I specifically stated I wasn't using Carroll as an example?
Oh and I never said Nani is worth £40 million either, but what's accuracy eh.
Wow gee, really? It's almost like your original post never mentioned the Real Madrid motivation and focused entirely on Nani's being 'deserving' of such an overture:
All comments on Nani's skill, yes?
'Basically' in Weeb world maybe.
In actuality, as said above I never used the extremes of the transfer market as an example, but also I never said you were 'wrong' to use stats (quote me?). I used stats to supplement my point by comparing him to Fabregas who it is not apparantly unreasonable to expect £50 million and over for, even though we can probably both agree that Nani wouldn't go for that mark in the event of a price being given to him, why would he be so far off it as to make anywhere near £40 million a 'hilarious' joke?
And 'thus' nothing, I never said Real WOULD go in for him, just that if they did that kind of price range wouldn't be laughable as you clearly thought it did.
My apologies, you mentioned it, but yeah, you were specifically not comparing it. I take it that one back.
No, but the original reason I posted was to mock someone who was suggesting that price.
If I say "Nani isn't worth £40m that's silly", and then you post "Yeah but he's maybe worth £30m", and then I say "Yeah, but he's not worth £40m, is he?", who exactly is wrong?*
The first one was throwaway comment, and the secnod one seems to include me calling him a "semi-talented larker", so err, yeah, I'd say there was a comment on his skill there.
You: Fabregas is worth £50m according to you lot, and yet Nani has better stats than him this season.
Me: Bendtner has decent stats in the same amount of games last season, and you wouldn't see him commanding big fees, therefore stats alone are a stupid comparison.
What's not to get?
So to surmise, you don't think Nani is worth £40m, and you don't think Real Madrid will be on the phone for him any time soon, and yet you've decided to start on me, for laughing at someone who did say that?
*Trick question, we're both wrong, because we're arguing on the internet.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,010
- Location
- Surrey
I think Nani is worth 40m, who would United replace him with if an offer were to come in 