Media Discussion - 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
I had to laugh, the Gomersall woman did her best to stir up the idea of Haaland and Pep having a barney at the end, and thentow fellas were really having none of it.

I've no idea why this has become a story. Haaland wasn't pissed off at Pep subbing him, he was pissed off at Pawson for allowing the Wolves centre half to foul him throughout the entire game. Watch the pictures just before he walks off......he's giving Pawson a right old mouthful. And rightly so imho.

Regarding the first penalty, I thought it was maybe harsh in a way. Ian Wright said Gvardiol had got his shot away and the Wolves player then caught him after that. But remember last season at Arsenal when Eddie clattered the Arsenal forward a fair time after he'd got his shot away. Alty gave the penalty. So if you give that, logic says you have to give the Gvardiol one.
 
Wonder if they have all been briefed to go for our atmosphere now they can't slander us about legal battles.

Big eared pricks idea of atmosphere is the cringey paper sounds from the king power or scousers singing karaoke.
Hmm. Makes you wonder. Think back to before the charges and all the digs were about empty seats and atmosphere. looks like its all they have left again
 
Funny how everyone has an issue with the penalty yesterday and for me it’s not a penalty……but I recall Ederson doing the same to Eddie Nketiah last year and apparently it was nailed on
Has to be so blatant for them to even accept we are due a penalty it’s embarrassing.
Arsenal get a penalty every time they are struggling to break a team down
 
I've no idea why this has become a story. Haaland wasn't pissed off at Pep subbing him, he was pissed off at Pawson for allowing the Wolves centre half to foul him throughout the entire game. Watch the pictures just before he walks off......he's giving Pawson a right old mouthful. And rightly so imho.

Regarding the first penalty, I thought it was maybe harsh in a way. Ian Wright said Gvardiol had got his shot away and the Wolves player then caught him after that. But remember last season at Arsenal when Eddie clattered the Arsenal forward a fair time after he'd got his shot away. Alty gave the penalty. So if you give that, logic says you have to give the Gvardiol one.

I said absolutely the same thing at the match. Exactly the same as the Eddie challenge last year against Arsenal but neither should ever be a penalty. The number of times someone puts a cross in and the defenders trys to block it and catches the man - be 4/5 every game.

But again further highlights the lack of consistency.
 
The Wolves player had his foot up attempting to play the ball, missed and connected with Gvardiol. It wansnt a challenge, coming together or attempted block but would be seen as a foul elsewhere on the pitch with the outcome almost certainly being inconsequential so nothing made of the decision. For me it was a clear and obvious penalty.

Even clearer was the penalty foul on Haaland. Spitty on the Sky commentary waffled on about getting something on the ball so no pen whilst Jonathan Pearce on the BBC MotD commentary immediately called clear foul and that a penalty had to be given.

In contrast Havertz clearly dragged his foot deliberately to make contact so should have been booked but a penalty was given. Probably as being the least controversial decision that suited the media and PL establishment given it was the Arsenal darling, tarquins playing little, cannon fodder Bournemouth.
Completely agree about the foul on Erling. What I couldn’t understand was how long and how many replays it took the ref to see what was bleeding obvious in real time never mind replays.
As for the Gvardiol one I just can’t see how it is clear and obvious - by that I mean it took umpteen replays to make a decent case for the penalty and it could quite easily have not been given. If that was given against us I bet you’d change your tune
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top