Racist podcast rant - Arsenal fan & 'Comedian' Alan Davies not happy with us

I really dislike cancel culture but we've seen people driven out of their jobs for saying much less offensive stuff. Personally, I want this kind of stuff hooked to my veins, there's nothing more satisfying than entitled wankers from the clubs that got lucky being decent when TV money came in losing their shit.
 
East Level 2 said:
That's what I keep hearing; consistency. Two penalty incidents, two correct decisions; that's consistency in my book.
Click to expand...

The consistency they argue for is in fact already there, they are just too stupid or dishonest to understand it. (Or are just whinging crybabies looking for any excuse where there is in fact none.)

The complaint is that Atwell wasn't sent to look at the monitor for their penalty claim where he was for ours. In fact, their penalty claim was reviewed by VAR. That review was conducted in Stockley Park. It found no evidence of a 'clear and obvious error.' That's why Atwell was not asked to look at the monitor himself. There was nothing that could justify him in overturning his own decision.

Likewise the claim that Jesus had been fouled will have been reviewed. Again, whether we think it should have been given or not, the referee has decided it wasn't, and there was no footage showing a clear and obvious error. Likewise each and every potential penalty shout that wasn't given.

The reason Atwell WAS asked to look at the footage again for the foul on Bernado was that there WAS evidence of a clear and obvious error, namely the shirt tug. Atwell had seen (or should be assumed to have seen) Xhaka's left leg come out in real time, and must have seen Silva fall. He decided that's not a penalty. Fair enough, that's his call, even if we disagree. But what VAR sees is the film of the shirt pull. That was clear footage. It was a clear foul. THAT's why Atwell is asked to review his decision. And when presented with evidence that his on-field decision was clearly and obviously wrong, he reversed it and awarded the penalty.

There is absolutely no inconsistency in the way VAR was applied.

The only inconsistency is that the media - Jonathan Northcroft, I'm looking at you and Darren Lewis - man the barricades with arguments about whether EPL referees are good enough whenever a contentious decision goes in City's favour (which isn't often.) The inconsistency is that none of them said a fucking word when Paul Tierney failed to send off James Milner twice when we played Liverpool.
 
Chris in London said:
The consistency they argue for is in fact already there, they are just too stupid or dishonest to understand it. (Or are just whinging crybabies looking for any excuse where there is in fact none.)

The complaint is that Atwell wasn't sent to look at the monitor for their penalty claim where he was for ours. In fact, their penalty claim was reviewed by VAR. That review was conducted in Stockley Park. It found no evidence of a 'clear and obvious error.' That's why Atwell was not asked to look at the monitor himself. There was nothing that could justify him in overturning his own decision.

Likewise the claim that Jesus had been fouled will have been reviewed. Again, whether we think it should have been given or not, the referee has decided it wasn't, and there was no footage showing a clear and obvious error. Likewise each and every potential penalty shout that wasn't given.

The reason Atwell WAS asked to look at the footage again for the foul on Bernado was that there WAS evidence of a clear and obvious error, namely the shirt tug. Atwell had seen (or should be assumed to have seen) Xhaka's left leg come out in real time, and must have seen Silva fall. He decided that's not a penalty. Fair enough, that's his call, even if we disagree. But what VAR sees is the film of the shirt pull. That was clear footage. It was a clear foul. THAT's why Atwell is asked to review his decision. And when presented with evidence that his on-field decision was clearly and obviously wrong, he reversed it and awarded the penalty.

There is absolutely no inconsistency in the way VAR was applied.

The only inconsistency is that the media - Jonathan Northcroft, I'm looking at you and Darren Lewis - man the barricades with arguments about whether EPL referees are good enough whenever a contentious decision goes in City's favour (which isn't often.) The inconsistency is that none of them said a fucking word when Paul Tierney failed to send off James Milner twice when we played Liverpool.
Click to expand...

People opinions were all driven by the BT production team desperate to make us look bad, they decided the narrative, stopped showing the angle where it wasn’t a penalty. They deliberately mis-communicated the reasons why the VAR incidents were different, ignored the Jesus penalty claim despite clear evidence.

As well as Arsenal played we missed 2 easy chances from set pieces in the first 20 minutes, Arsenals chances missed were bad luck ours, like Jesus penalty appeal were whitewashed.

Fletcher was the main driver of the agenda followed by Humphrey so whether it was them or the bitter prick in their ears but for all the sensationalism they’ve embarrassed themselves.

Arsenal face a charge, BT should also.
 
Chris in London said:
The consistency they argue for is in fact already there, they are just too stupid or dishonest to understand it. (Or are just whinging crybabies looking for any excuse where there is in fact none.)

The complaint is that Atwell wasn't sent to look at the monitor for their penalty claim where he was for ours. In fact, their penalty claim was reviewed by VAR. That review was conducted in Stockley Park. It found no evidence of a 'clear and obvious error.' That's why Atwell was not asked to look at the monitor himself. There was nothing that could justify him in overturning his own decision.

Likewise the claim that Jesus had been fouled will have been reviewed. Again, whether we think it should have been given or not, the referee has decided it wasn't, and there was no footage showing a clear and obvious error. Likewise each and every potential penalty shout that wasn't given.

The reason Atwell WAS asked to look at the footage again for the foul on Bernado was that there WAS evidence of a clear and obvious error, namely the shirt tug. Atwell had seen (or should be assumed to have seen) Xhaka's left leg come out in real time, and must have seen Silva fall. He decided that's not a penalty. Fair enough, that's his call, even if we disagree. But what VAR sees is the film of the shirt pull. That was clear footage. It was a clear foul. THAT's why Atwell is asked to review his decision. And when presented with evidence that his on-field decision was clearly and obviously wrong, he reversed it and awarded the penalty.

There is absolutely no inconsistency in the way VAR was applied.

The only inconsistency is that the media - Jonathan Northcroft, I'm looking at you and Darren Lewis - man the barricades with arguments about whether EPL referees are good enough whenever a contentious decision goes in City's favour (which isn't often.) The inconsistency is that none of them said a fucking word when Paul Tierney failed to send off James Milner twice when we played Liverpool.
Click to expand...
Darren Lewis was a right **** with this last Sunday morning.

In his opinion the decision of no Pen by Ederson was right but then he proceeded to ramble on that the ref should've gone to check the screen as he did with Bernardo's pen.

What a cock, so he thought it was right but the ref should've watched it again on a small tele just to say "no pen" again.

Fuckin madness with these Hacks & Pundits.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.