United v Arsenal **SPOILER**
- Thread starter Big Kev
- Start date
Violent conduct. Same for Keown really. Cannot comment on a stamp by ruud as I didn't see it in the game.
The comment I made was that Man U should have won, & they should. They had the home advantage, they had more shots on target (i.e. more than none) & chased the game unlike Arsenal who were playing for a draw (was like watching Liverpool in places even Arsenal fans must have been bored) & really really showing how they don't deserve their reputation as being a team with disapline problems
Tbh, I think Arsenal are heading toward being more disliked than Chelsea for me now which is kind of a shocker for me as I really don't like Chelsea
edit for Jazz - the above + you should have been a number of players down thus couldn't have defended as well.
Well I really dont know as I didn't see them I only saw what happed after the match on sky and that involved the Arsenal players, but if they did throw punches like stated it makes them no better than the Arsenal players, BUT there is no evidence of this (camera footage) whereas for our incidents there oviously was so it's kinda your word againt ours!
Man of Honour
In the world according to Andy Gray anything that hits the woodwork is on target
Can't do anything but show approval for this. Dead right.
Soldato
So Why should AFC be charged by video evidence when other players are doing things (might be /might not) on camera are not charged? Double Standards?
Either every indicent should be looked at or none.
Man of Honour
What can the FA do if the cameras don't catch it? Poll the fans? They can't ask the ref, he's already made his report. 4th official? Possibly, but how could he see more than the ref?
True, but anyone can say he threw a punch at me afterwards and make allegations etc. Arsenal may just be trying to find excuses for what happened and may hope to get off lighter by making us look as bad as there were by making these allegations (spelling?).
(Well you asked for my opinion)
Soldato
Exactly my point. Why should one person be charged because a camera caught it yet another is not.
Why should a game shown Live on Sky be examined more closely than any other?
Also I find it amazing that people are talking about a points deduction, this is purely because Richard Keys suggested it!
Soldato
It was the newspaper report (link above somewhere) who have claimed he threw a punch at Parlour
Man of Honour
Proof. Evidence. Innocent until proven guilty.
I don't think that was ever a design, merely a bonus.
I hope not. Keys known almost as little as Hansen.
Soldato
Agreed but what about when they won't/don't use it?
(slightly off topic)
What about when Vieria was send off v Chelsea last year. He was accused of mouthing off (like most players do) Yet Druso's version was completely untrue. An expert lip reader was used to prove what he said was different to Druso's version of eventsand was in fact a lie, yet he was still charged?
(on topic)
What annoys most is when it is used in some case's yet not in others?
xgfunk
X
xgfunk
sorry but what youve stated makes no sense to me, did i mention confidence ? dont think i did. i simply stated Man Utd are playing bad at the momment, we always start bad, in recent seasons we have anyway.
Man of Honour
Consistency is the key. The FA need to show that they are ridding themselves of the manyoo bias they've shown for the past 10 years
Didn't know anything about that so can't comment. Sounds unfair to me though.
Maybe its because Durso knows he's ****.
Again, all about consistency.
Man of Honour
Amen to that! You can all stop yer spamming now