I know it's easy to become a paranoid Arsenal fan. But I have never seen such obvious dislike for

[Pat Vegas]

Arsenal from commentators/pundits etc.

Maybe I am blind from my Arsenal support but we can't even get someone to even support us over a foul decision.

Chamakh when he played for us was a useless player. But playing against us he is a world beater who would have ran 45 yards and scored for sure. Even without contact. There is no way he can run faster with the ball than Arteta without the ball chasing him. Maybe Michael Owen assumes everyone has the pace he once had.

But then the presenters ask these pundits in my eyes 'loaded' questions. They know what the reaction will be but they can't resist to ask what are Arsenal's title changes. In some respects they are right. It's far to early. And our track record over the past few years would suggest we will not win the league. But it's the way they do it.

Even compliments have to have some sort of backhanded insult thrown in them.

[PSRB]

doesn't even attempt to hide it or make the occasional positive comment. At least Craig Burley did

[Monty91]

prior to Chamakh leaning into him, essentially acknowledging the foul.

It was harsh in hindsight, but are you honestly claiming your first reaction wasn't that he may be in trouble?

[Snin]

the replay and still not seeing what is fecking obvious when shown from different angle and slowed down!

[Pat Vegas]

with it is.

From the reverse angle the ball is going towards Chamakh's Right. he then veers left purposely to make contact with Arteta. If you were going for a genuine goal scoring chance you'd head towards the ball not towards Arteta. So he knew what he was doing. But they should clear up this last man/goal scoring opportunity stuff.

[The JBear]

[Pat Vegas]

:hehe: what an idiot.

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

[PSRB]

[Monty91]

The intent of Arteta to obstruct Chamakh is evident on the replays. And I think it denied Chamakh a good goalscoring opportunity :shrug:

[Pat Vegas]

[PSRB]

[Monty91]

And the closest Arsenal player was behind the play and too far away to prevent a clear shot at goal.

[redgunamo]

[Monty91]

across him (which is a foul) whilst Chamakh merely leaned in.

[redgunamo]

[Classic Jorge]

[Norn Iron]

[Ashberto]

It's supposed to be the Wille Young rule based on clear hacks down when clear through on goal.

[Mack]

[barrybueno]

[PSRB]

good have made a poor next touch, pushed it wider, tried to pass to the chap coming through the middle. Seen plenty of forwards give it a heavy touch when clean through.

Would the defender (Ramsey, I think) have got back? Possibly, he's certainly a lot quicker than Chamakh

[PSRB]

[PSRB]

[Mack]

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

in two seconds. I found this surprisingly quick, but assumed he meant without the ball. Surely dribbling must slow one down a little?

Let's say the challenge occurred 10 yards inside our half, so 50 yards from the bye-line, or, given the angle, 55 yards from goal. Let's say Chamakh is lethal from, say, 35 yards. (Top corner, LIKE AN ARROW!)

So, he was 20 yards from a lethal position, with his speed, at the sprint, (according to Michael Owen) some 378 mph, or 67 mps - this means that we still have 0.48 of a nanosecond for a covering defender to get back.

:judge: :yellowcard: NOT :redcard:

N.B. A couple of these figures are estimates.

[Pat Vegas]

break quickly and they are outnumbered. So many times you will see the midfielder pull out the cynical foul to stop the play. Which is always yellow. In this situation there is still a lot to do but but it could lead to a goal scoring opportunity.

The position of Chamakh was so far away he had so much more to do. And with the ball Arteta would still possibly have a chance to catch him. So I really don't think it's a clear goal scoring opportunity. I think he sent him off solely due this last man thing.

[Harry Balls]

-l Wenger has us on, and that's the stick they beat us with when things don't work out. It's a form of flattery. Wenger sets the bar high, so when you get a stupid situation like our slowest player being our cover against counter attacks, it's open season for them to take pot shots at us.

[Monty91]

decision that many are claiming.

[Bergkamp's Brain]

[Peter]

Then i expect to see plenty more red cards. The fact is, it isnt. 9/10 the ref will stick with a yellow card because there is simply too much doubt in there.

[Pat Vegas]

The ref can pull over a player and give him a red card or 3 points on his licence.

[Pat Vegas]

[Peter]

Denying An obvious assist opportunity does not result in a red card :-)

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

[Peter]

It needs to be obvious and it was obvious that it wasnt. f**king hell, the ball isnt even moving in the direction of the goal. He has to fetch and cut in ahead of arteta, none of which he has done at the time of the foul. There is plenty to do.

If we want that to be a red card then fine but i am going to need to see it given in other games. And i wnt to see the pundits aree with it.

[ITSUPFORGRABSNOW]

[Pat Vegas]

scoring position.

[Pokster]

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

[Peter]

[Monty91]

If so, why?

If not, stop lying!

[Pat Vegas]

On occasion I think it deserves red but by the rule book there is not much you can do.

[Luis Anaconda]

they are all out to get us :rolleyes:

[redgunamo]

[Luis Anaconda]

[Pat Vegas]

after the whistle has blown.

So nothing would surprise me.

Though I agree with that decision now the rapist left.

[Brentwood]

You can't argue that a striker with half the pitch to run into with no other players ahead of him isn't a goalscoring opportunity, however bad a player MC is

[Brentwood]

http://www.awimb.com/fudforum/index.php?t=tree&goto=3785 434&rid=164&S=0ca75d367dd3ec373052aa8a34b32975 (http://www.awimb.com/fudforum/index.php?t=tree&goto=3785434&rid=164&S=0ca75d367dd3ec373052aa8a34b32975)

[Peter]

Because the camera hadnt shown it then.

Once i saw it my mind flashed red but then immediately thought he would probably be ok because it was f**king miles from goal.

I wasnt shocked when i saw the red. Its a silly question anyway. I am a worrier by nature and m more likely than some to fear the worst. It doesnt make it any more or less of a red card.

I am willing to settle on it being harsh. You cant prove i either way but the level of doubt means that refs would more often than not stifk with a yellow.

[Blupunter]

Good to know some fings never change.

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

[Peter]

Nevertheless, every pundit defended the decision on that very ground.

Agreed, it isnt the issue.

[Brentwood]

[Luis Anaconda]

Just how **** is Joe Hart?

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

[Pat Vegas]

Do you know how to fix fridge doors?

[Pat Vegas]

bit like parking the bus.

[Blupunter]

He's not **** but his mistakes have led to three defeats this season.

He's still England's errrr number errrr one.

<coughs>

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

[Supermac1976]

http://youtu.be/NtBWefg5md0
:hehe:

[Luis Anaconda]

didn't even book the Palace c**t (who made about 7 fouls in the game before whimping with cramp on 70 minutes)

[Sir Charlie of Nicholas]

[Luis Anaconda]

Playing like an English Almunia

[Blupunter]

Believe it or not, I sell kitchens for a living. Would you like to buy a new kitchen?

[Blupunter]

Agreed. Living off a reputation gained more than a year ago.

[R.C. Celebrating the return of Trophies]

just another load of old bollox in the anti arsenal box

[R.C. Celebrating the return of Trophies]

I actually started watching that

[Goonerjae]

[R.C. Celebrating the return of Trophies]

Have a look underneath to find the missing nut

[ITSUPFORGRABSNOW]

The second for not appealing for a penalty at all and just getting straight up. What a ****er Durkin really was. All the sweeter when we went on to win with ten men.