We used to cream our pants when Freddie and Bobby P scored 15 a season from out wide.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Or when Limpar or Overmars scored something like 17 in their first seasons.

But Feo's a donkey for scoring 19 last season when he didn't even play for the last 3 months.

I know I don't understand football, and I'm sure someone will point out that a front 3 is different to 4-4-2 (even though all those above-mentioned Arsenal teams played with a left winger and a right sided MF who tucked in.)

It's all cos he's quick, coffee colured and wears 14 isn't it? We wanted him to be Titi and never forgave him for not being.

Do we still have to play Everton this season? When is it? I'll put money on a Feo brace.

[IUFG]

Or when Limpar or Overmars scored something like 17 in their first seasons.

But Feo's a donkey for scoring 19 last season when he didn't even play for the last 3 months.

I know I don't understand football, and I'm sure someone will point out that a front 3 is different to 4-4-2 (even though all those above-mentioned Arsenal teams played with a left winger and a right sided MF who tucked in.)

It's all cos he's quick, coffee colured and wears 14 isn't it? We wanted him to be Titi and never forgave him for not being.

Do we still have to play Everton this season? When is it? I'll put money on a Feo brace.

Are you actually suggesting that Arsenal use formations when they play matches?

[SWv2]

Or when Limpar or Overmars scored something like 17 in their first seasons.

But Feo's a donkey for scoring 19 last season when he didn't even play for the last 3 months.

I know I don't understand football, and I'm sure someone will point out that a front 3 is different to 4-4-2 (even though all those above-mentioned Arsenal teams played with a left winger and a right sided MF who tucked in.)

It's all cos he's quick, coffee colured and wears 14 isn't it? We wanted him to be Titi and never forgave him for not being.

Do we still have to play Everton this season? When is it? I'll put money on a Feo brace.

Jesus Christ GG, are you actually drawing a favourable comparison between TJ and Pires?

Ftr I never creamed anything about Freddie, ever.

[IUFG]

Ftr I never creamed anything about Freddie, ever.

Quite right, Freddie scored double digit league goals twice. 2001/2002 and 2004/2005

Robert, on the other hand achieved this three times. And a season with 9.

Still, Freddie was a fine player. And subject to one of Riley's most ridicules piece of refereeing ever.

[SWv2]

Quite right, Freddie scored double digit league goals twice. 2001/2002 and 2004/2005

Robert, on the other hand achieved this three times. And a season with 9.

Still, Freddie was a fine player. And subject to one of Riley's most ridicules piece of refereeing ever.

Ferdinand?

[IUFG]

Ferdinand?

exactly...

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Jesus Christ GG, are you actually drawing a favourable comparison between TJ and Pires?

Ftr I never creamed anything about Freddie, ever.

Oh, I did. 2002 run in. Against WHU. 1st half, Cashley cleared off the line in front of us in the North Bank. (The ball was clearly over.)

Then with about ten mins left, Freddie scored in front of us from a Dennis pass.

And his goal vs Juve after Dennis slowed down time with is right boot.

And he had red hair.

[Peter]

exactly...

To be fair, its up against some pretty stiff competition in that one game alone.

I still cant quite believe he gave that penalty...not just because it was a very, very obvious dive but also because even if there had been contact there is no way on earth he could have seen it as it was on the blind side of him. His linesman would have had a perfect view of it and said nothing- then again, this is the same linesman that was two yards away from Van Nistlerooy stamping his studs down Cole's shin and remarkably managed to completely miss that even though it was inches from where he was looking.

[IUFG]

To be fair, its up against some pretty stiff competition in that one game alone.

I still cant quite believe he gave that penalty...not just because it was a very, very obvious dive but also because even if there had been contact there is no way on earth he could have seen it as it was on the blind side of him. His linesman would have had a perfect view of it and said nothing- then again, this is the same linesman that was two yards away from Van Nistlerooy stamping his studs down Cole's shin and remarkably managed to completely miss that even though it was inches from where he was looking.

The Ljungberg and Cole incidents were the clearest of the reddest, red cards. Both not even resulting in a booking, of course. Ridicules. Riley? ****.

[Pokster]

To be fair, its up against some pretty stiff competition in that one game alone.

I still cant quite believe he gave that penalty...not just because it was a very, very obvious dive but also because even if there had been contact there is no way on earth he could have seen it as it was on the blind side of him. His linesman would have had a perfect view of it and said nothing- then again, this is the same linesman that was two yards away from Van Nistlerooy stamping his studs down Cole's shin and remarkably managed to completely miss that even though it was inches from where he was looking.

different linesman imo

[Peter]

different linesman imo

ah yes, you are c React. So they were both bent then :)

That is 3 out of 3- full house.

[Peter]

The Ljungberg and Cole incidents were the clearest of the reddest, red cards. Both not even resulting in a booking, of course. Ridicules. Riley? ****.

The clearest proof that the whole thing was bent was that united's entire game plan was based on Riley doing exactly what he did.

People will happily tell you these days that united were simply muscling us out of the game because we don't like it up them. This completely ignores the fact that that Arsenal side were a handful and were not the sort to be intimidated.

The truth is unted's game plan was based on kicking us as hard and as often as possible to disrupt the game, injure players and hopefully to get us to retaliate, knowing full well that their players would not get punished whatever they did (see Neville, Rio, van nistelrooy) whereas if a single Arsenal player had reacted badly they would have been sent off.

United constructed their entire game plan on the ref giving them everything they wanted. That is a hell of a risk unless you KNOW you can rely on it.

[Viva Prat Vegas]

From the Angry ofIslington blog :
"A few Arsenal players questioned the linesman while Cole was being treated, and the linesman certainly had a better chance of seeing it than the ref. But from the linesman’s angle (facing Cole directly) at full speed, when maybe he was concentrating on his main jobs of seeing who the ball last came off and whether anyone was offside, I can see why he missed it. Maybe he shouldn’t have missed it, but it’s feasible that he did. You may not believe me about the speed. All I can say is go and watch it again yourself."
8-)

[Burney]

The clearest proof that the whole thing was bent was that united's entire game plan was based on Riley doing exactly what he did.

People will happily tell you these days that united were simply muscling us out of the game because we don't like it up them. This completely ignores the fact that that Arsenal side were a handful and were not the sort to be intimidated.

The truth is unted's game plan was based on kicking us as hard and as often as possible to disrupt the game, injure players and hopefully to get us to retaliate, knowing full well that their players would not get punished whatever they did (see Neville, Rio, van nistelrooy) whereas if a single Arsenal player had reacted badly they would have been sent off.

United constructed their entire game plan on the ref giving them everything they wanted. That is a hell of a risk unless you KNOW you can rely on it.

Dunno. If players see a referee isn't going to punish them to commit fouls, it will embolden them to commit more and worse fouls. I think United got that sense after a couple of the early 'reducers' on JAR went unpunished and it got worse from there. Equally, linesmen will take their lead from the ref.

In short, I don't believe the game was bent because 'cui bono?' I do, however, believe that Riley was biased (consciously or unconsciously) against Arsenal and refereed accordingly. Still disgraceful, but not 'bent' in the sense of there being a conspiracy.

What I did find extraordinary, though, was the determination of the media to largely ignore the appalling refereeing of such a big game. I can only conclude that this was because they realised most of their audience (and football more widely) wanted Arsenal to lose and so they didn't want to question the legitimacy of that result by pointing out that it was probably the most dreadfully biased and incompetent refereeing display in the history of the Premier League.

[Peter]

From the Angry ofIslington blog :
"A few Arsenal players questioned the linesman while Cole was being treated, and the linesman certainly had a better chance of seeing it than the ref. But from the linesman’s angle (facing Cole directly) at full speed, when maybe he was concentrating on his main jobs of seeing who the ball last came off and whether anyone was offside, I can see why he missed it. Maybe he shouldn’t have missed it, but it’s feasible that he did. You may not believe me about the speed. All I can say is go and watch it again yourself."
8-)

I have watched it myself- not a chance in hell. The linesman is perfectly positioned and is looking directly at the bal, which is bouncing directly in line with Cole's shin. The linesman is looking directly at the Ballard therefore directly at Cole's shin. He sees the incident perfectly. Van Nistelrooy is heading back away from goal, offside is completely irrelevant.

It doesnt happen at particularly high speed. I am sorry, if a guy cant see that then. He cant see anything at all. I wouldn't trust him to drive a bike let alone run the line in a professional match.

He saw it perfectly.

[Peter]

Dunno. If players see a referee isn't going to punish them to commit fouls, it will embolden them to commit more and worse fouls. I think United got that sense after a couple of the early 'reducers' on JAR went unpunished and it got worse from there. Equally, linesmen will take their lead from the ref.

In short, I don't believe the game was bent because 'cui bono?' I do, however, believe that Riley was biased (consciously or unconsciously) against Arsenal and refereed accordingly. Still disgraceful, but not 'bent' in the sense of there being a conspiracy.

What I did find extraordinary, though, was the determination of the media to largely ignore the appalling refereeing of such a big game. I can only conclude that this was because they realised most of their audience (and football more widely) wanted Arsenal to lose and so they didn't want to question the legitimacy of that result by pointing out that it was probably the most dreadfully biased and incompetent refereeing display in the history of the Premier League.

I dont really buy that at all. I am not saying that Riley was on the payroll. I am saying that United knew full well before the game that they could seriously take the piss and he wouldn't lift a finger. Either through indirect influence, sheer pressure or just because they knew Riley was hopelessly weak. You can see this in how they pressure him after every awful challenge. Neville goes up and screams in his face after hacking Reyes to the floor or the third time. What on earth is he complaining about? How can he possibly be angry about something?

This was not the usual example of a ref being a 'homer'... it was the clearest possible example of a referee being simply unwilling to give any kind of decision against one side and that side being very, very confident that that was the case.

I think the premier league should be eternally ashamed of the fact that the longest unbeaten run in its history was brought to an end in this fashion.

The media chose to focus on the pizza incident afterwards instead- hard to believe but somehow we came out of this game as the bad guys!

[World's End Stella]

I dont really buy that at all. I am not saying that Riley was on the payroll. I am saying that United knew full well before the game that they could seriously take the piss and he wouldn't lift a finger. Either through indirect influence, sheer pressure or just because they knew Riley was hopelessly weak. You can see this in how they pressure him after every awful challenge. Neville goes up and screams in his face after hacking Reyes to the floor or the third time. What on earth is he complaining about? How can he possibly be angry about something?

This was not the usual example of a ref being a 'homer'... it was the clearest possible example of a referee being simply unwilling to give any kind of decision against one side and that side being very, very confident that that was the case.

I think the premier league should be eternally ashamed of the fact that the longest unbeaten run in its history was brought to an end in this fashion.

The media chose to focus on the pizza incident afterwards instead- hard to believe but somehow we came out of this game as the bad guys!

I doubt ManU went into the game confident that Riley would cheat for them, however in the back of their minds they also knew what his record was for them.

The key point in the match was probably the Cole yellow. The Munichs had just spent about 10-15 minutes kicking Reyes off the park and G Neville probably should have seen red at that point, yet they hadn't received a card of any kind. At that point Cole commits a slightly cynical, non-violent foul and gets a yellow.

I'm guessing that at that point they all thought to themselves 'game on - this is 12 v 11' and then proceeded to act accordingly over the rest of the game.

But shouldn't we move on? No one was angrier than I, no one remains as bitter and twisted as I (well, maybe IUFG) but surely we should get over this? I mean, it really isn't healthy. :-(

[Burney]

I dont really buy that at all. I am not saying that Riley was on the payroll. I am saying that United knew full well before the game that they could seriously take the piss and he wouldn't lift a finger. Either through indirect influence, sheer pressure or just because they knew Riley was hopelessly weak. You can see this in how they pressure him after every awful challenge. Neville goes up and screams in his face after hacking Reyes to the floor or the third time. What on earth is he complaining about? How can he possibly be angry about something?

This was not the usual example of a ref being a 'homer'... it was the clearest possible example of a referee being simply unwilling to give any kind of decision against one side and that side being very, very confident that that was the case.

I think the premier league should be eternally ashamed of the fact that the longest unbeaten run in its history was brought to an end in this fashion.

The media chose to focus on the pizza incident afterwards instead- hard to believe but somehow we came out of this game as the bad guys!

I think lots of factors came into play. Ferguson certainly told them to target our players and probably said Riley 'lets the game flow' at OT, so you'll probably get away with it. I agree it was the worst example of bias and incompetence I've ever seen in a top English game, I'm just saying I don't think its bentness was planned or orchestrated.

As I say, the media reaction was the most extraordinary thing. Normally, TV can't stop poring over bad refereeing, but here it was simply glossed over. It was genuinely weird and ensured that I'll never believe there isn't an anti-Arsenal bias in the media.

[Peter]

I doubt ManU went into the game confident that Riley would cheat for them, however in the back of their minds they also knew what his record was for them.

The key point in the match was probably the Cole yellow. The Munichs had just spent about 10-15 minutes kicking Reyes off the park and G Neville probably should have seen red at that point, yet they hadn't received a card of any kind. At that point Cole commits a slightly cynical, non-violent foul and gets a yellow.

I'm guessing that at that point they all thought to themselves 'game on - this is 12 v 11' and then proceeded to act accordingly over the rest of the game.

But shouldn't we move on? No one was angrier than I, no one remains as bitter and twisted as I (well, maybe IUFG) but surely we should get over this? I mean, it really isn't healthy. :-(

I think we would get over it if it was ever accepted that it happened. It continues to eat at people because it was roundly ignored.

THe problem with your argument is that Cole's challenge was a yellow card. A fairly soft one, but a deliberate kick with no attempt to play the ball. You are highlighting about the only decision Riley got right in the whole game!

I think it is incredibly generous to think that United's approach to that game was accidental, or opportunist. Particularly having seen them do it time and time again against us at Old Trafford (never at Highbury) and had seen it work pretty much all the time. Vieira's sending off, the soft penalty, the game in 2002 when Van Nistelrooy came on for twenty minutes and, if I remember correctly, committed two blatant red card offences (one a punch in Frieddie's chest right in front of the ref) and at least three other yellow card offences and not get so much as a booking.

[Peter]

I think lots of factors came into play. Ferguson certainly told them to target our players and probably said Riley 'lets the game flow' at OT, so you'll probably get away with it. I agree it was the worst example of bias and incompetence I've ever seen in a top English game, I'm just saying I don't think its bentness was planned or orchestrated.

As I say, the media reaction was the most extraordinary thing. Normally, TV can't stop poring over bad refereeing, but here it was simply glossed over. It was genuinely weird and ensured that I'll never believe there isn't an anti-Arsenal bias in the media.

I think there were bigger stories than poor refereeing. THe most obvious one was the end of the unbeaten run- people love to see a team taken down a peg or two so the public probably enjoyed it. Secondly, I think a lot of people hadn't forgiven us for the fight att he end of the game the season before. Ferguson managed to manipulate this to look as though we had 'gotten away with it'.

The press wanted another fight and so they focused on the pizza incident rather than the game.

I wouldn't agree there is a broad anti Arsenal agenda in the media. I do think there was a huge bulk of the media that was pro United and pro Ferguson, or at least too scared to criticise him/them.

[IUFG]

But shouldn't we move on? No one was angrier than I, no one remains as bitter and twisted as I (well, maybe IUFG) but surely we should get over this? I mean, it really isn't healthy. :-(

I will always be bitter and twisted whilst that **** is still involved in the professional game.

That fact that he is still highly influential in the game boils my piss.

[Burney]

I will always be bitter and twisted whilst that **** is still involved in the professional game.

That fact that he is still highly influential in the game boils my piss.

:nod: That game ought to have ended - or at least severely damaged - his career as a top-flight referee. That he not only didn't suffer, but actually prospered is a disgrace.

[Peter]

:nod: That game ought to have ended - or at least severely damaged - his career as a top-flight referee. That he not only didn't suffer, but actually prospered is a disgrace.

Important to remember that it wasnt just that game. His refereeing at Old Trafford was infamous throughout the game.

[Burney]

Important to remember that it wasnt just that game. His refereeing at Old Trafford was infamous throughout the game.

Yes, but that big a game with that much scrutiny on it. :shakehead: Logically, he should have been working harder than ever to display less bias than usual. But not our Mike. Oh, no.

[SWv2]

Jesus christ chaps, it is over a decade ago.

Let it go. No good will come of this.

[Burney]

Jesus christ chaps, it is over a decade ago.

Let it go. No good will come of this.

No offence, sw, but an Irishman telling you not to nurture an ancient grievance is like a Welshman telling you not to have sex with farmyard animals.

[World's End Stella]

I think we would get over it if it was ever accepted that it happened. It continues to eat at people because it was roundly ignored.

THe problem with your argument is that Cole's challenge was a yellow card. A fairly soft one, but a deliberate kick with no attempt to play the ball. You are highlighting about the only decision Riley got right in the whole game!

I think it is incredibly generous to think that United's approach to that game was accidental, or opportunist. Particularly having seen them do it time and time again against us at Old Trafford (never at Highbury) and had seen it work pretty much all the time. Vieira's sending off, the soft penalty, the game in 2002 when Van Nistelrooy came on for twenty minutes and, if I remember correctly, committed two blatant red card offences (one a punch in Frieddie's chest right in front of the ref) and at least three other yellow card offences and not get so much as a booking.

I never said it was accidental, I said I don't think that they expected Riley to cheat, I think they discovered that he was cheating once the game started and acted accordingly.

They clearly targeted Reyes as a group and I would be surprised if there wasn't some direction from the manager there. Nice comparison to the FA Cup game there where they did the same thing, came out kicking us all over the pitch. Jeff Winter immediately pulled out the cards, the game settled down and we played football and won 2-0.

Still think we should move on, mind. :-)

[Burney]

I never said it was accidental, I said I don't think that they expected Riley, I think they discovered that he was cheating once the game started and acted accordingly.

They clearly targeted Reyes as a group and I would be surprised if there wasn't some direction from the manager there. Nice comparison to the FA Cup game there where they did the same thing, came out kicking us all over the pitch. Jeff Winter immediately pulled out the cards, the game settled down and we played football and won 2-0.

Still think we should move on, mind. :-)

When did football fans ever 'move on'? :shrug: It's just not what they do.

[SWv2]

When did football fans ever 'move on'? :shrug: It's just not what they do.

We as a nation moved on from Henry's handball.

Well some of us did.

[Burney]

We as a nation moved on from Henry's handball.

Well some of us did.

Let me guess: the Arsenal-supporting ones did? The others not so much? :hehe:

[SWv2]

Let me guess: the Arsenal-supporting ones did? The others not so much? :hehe:

I still often hear him referred to in very unpleasant ways - "cheating French ****" as such.

:hehe:

[IUFG]

Jesus christ chaps, it is over a decade ago.

Let it go. No good will come of this.

let it go?

I still can't forgive Tomas for this stinking pile of horse****e!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPX005dnOG4

[Peter]

I never said it was accidental, I said I don't think that they expected Riley to cheat, I think they discovered that he was cheating once the game started and acted accordingly.

They clearly targeted Reyes as a group and I would be surprised if there wasn't some direction from the manager there. Nice comparison to the FA Cup game there where they did the same thing, came out kicking us all over the pitch. Jeff Winter immediately pulled out the cards, the game settled down and we played football and won 2-0.

Still think we should move on, mind. :-)

Accidental, or opportunist. You seem to be saying it was unplanned and they spotted Riley was cheating and seized on it. I dont agree with that at all. Given his history at Old Trafford they would be remarkably stupid if they didnt already know how he would react.

It is funny, you will find plenty of journalists and articles rubbishing the notion that the nevilles targeted Reyes. This despite Phil Neville himself saying that he and his brother did target Reyes, that it was all part of the plan, and that they knew it would ruffle Arsenal.

I will move on when we get justice. :)

[Burney]

I still often hear him referred to in very unpleasant ways - "cheating French ****" as such.

:hehe:

To be fair, at least two of those epithets are demonstrably true (and I wouldn't rule out the third). :hehe:

[IUFG]

I will move on when we get justice. :)

That's the spirit, p. :thumbup:

Riley being pushed off a very tall building will just about sate me.

[Peter]

let it go?

I still can't forgive Tomas for this stinking pile of horse****e!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPX005dnOG4

Watching the video of the game the year before is great fun. Three of them give Van Nistelrooy a 'nudge'...

Happier times :)

[Burney]

Accidental, or opportunist. You seem to be saying it was unplanned and they spotted Riley was cheating and seized on it. I dont agree with that at all. Given his history at Old Trafford they would be remarkably stupid if they didnt already know how he would react.

It is funny, you will find plenty of journalists and articles rubbishing the notion that the nevilles targeted Reyes. This despite Phil Neville himself saying that he and his brother did target Reyes, that it was all part of the plan, and that they knew it would ruffle Arsenal.

I will move on when we get justice. :)

My guess is they knew that any ref would probably let them get away with more at home - such was the sway United (more specifically Ferguson) held over the game back then. The fact that it was Riley probably barely registered.

[Peter]

That's the spirit, p. :thumbup:

Riley being pushed off a very tall building will just about sate me.

And someone giving Van Nistelrooy a ****ing good kicking......

[Burney]

That's the spirit, p. :thumbup:

Riley being pushed off a very tall building will just about sate me.

Too easy. I'd insist on him being made to confess his crimes in front of a public show trial before being executed by Arsenal players past and present putting 'competitive' challenges into him until he dies. It should only take a day or so.

[Peter]

My guess is they knew that any ref would probably let them get away with more at home - such was the sway United (more specifically Ferguson) held over the game back then. The fact that it was Riley probably barely registered.

Well, yes. They did it every year at Old TRafford and more often than not it worked. THey did it even more on this occasion which is why Riley had to up his game a bit to keep up.

[Burney]

And someone giving Van Nistelrooy a ****ing good kicking......

By the way, I see Momentum now has control of the NEC and the new disciplinary head's first move was to drop a range of investigations into anti-semitism. :hehe: Presumably this is on the grounds that anti-semitism can't exist if you don't look for it.

You aren't seriously going to vote for this absolute shítshow are you, p?

[World's End Stella]

Accidental, or opportunist. You seem to be saying it was unplanned and they spotted Riley was cheating and seized on it. I dont agree with that at all. Given his history at Old Trafford they would be remarkably stupid if they didnt already know how he would react.

It is funny, you will find plenty of journalists and articles rubbishing the notion that the nevilles targeted Reyes. This despite Phil Neville himself saying that he and his brother did target Reyes, that it was all part of the plan, and that they knew it would ruffle Arsenal.

I will move on when we get justice. :)

So you think I'm saying that it was unplanned despite the fact that I said 'they clearly targeted Reyes'?

We'll never get justice, Peter, it wouldn't suit us. :-)

[Peter]

So you think I'm saying that it was unplanned despite the fact that I said 'they clearly targeted Reyes'?

We'll never get justice, Peter, it wouldn't suit us. :-)

Well, you are saying that by suggesting that the players spotted Riley was ignoring stuff and seized on it. What is that if not unplanned?

[Peter]

By the way, I see Momentum now has control of the NEC and the new disciplinary head's first move was to drop a range of investigations into anti-semitism. :hehe: Presumably this is on the grounds that anti-semitism can't exist if you don't look for it.

You aren't seriously going to vote for this absolute shítshow are you, p?

Of course I am. at this point I will vote for them purely to annoy you. :)

[Burney]

Of course I am. at this point I will vote for them purely to annoy you. :)

I get that, of course, but they really are getting quite seriously sinister now. :-(

[Peter]

I get that, of course, but they really are getting quite seriously sinister now. :-(

I am finding myself increasingly bemused by more or less all human behaviour these days. Time to buy that remote island I always dreamed about.....

[World's End Stella]

Well, you are saying that by suggesting that the players spotted Riley was ignoring stuff and seized on it. What is that if not unplanned?

Targeting Reyes was planned, some of the other stuff was also planned and some was probably unplanned and probably encouraged by Riley cheating.

They are not mutually exclusive. You need to think outside the box, Peter. :-)

[Ash]

Mike Riley is from Leeds.

Dirty Leeds.

[IUFG]

Mike Riley is from Leeds.

Dirty Leeds.

as if we needed a reason to hate him even more...

[Peter]

Targeting Reyes was planned, some of the other stuff was also planned and some was probably unplanned and probably encouraged by Riley cheating.

They are not mutually exclusive. You need to think outside the box, Peter. :-)

Well, that is horribly confused and not what you said :)

[Chief Arrowhead]

Dunno. If players see a referee isn't going to punish them to commit fouls, it will embolden them to commit more and worse fouls. I think United got that sense after a couple of the early 'reducers' on JAR went unpunished and it got worse from there. Equally, linesmen will take their lead from the ref.

In short, I don't believe the game was bent because 'cui bono?' I do, however, believe that Riley was biased (consciously or unconsciously) against Arsenal and refereed accordingly. Still disgraceful, but not 'bent' in the sense of there being a conspiracy.

What I did find extraordinary, though, was the determination of the media to largely ignore the appalling refereeing of such a big game. I can only conclude that this was because they realised most of their audience (and football more widely) wanted Arsenal to lose and so they didn't want to question the legitimacy of that result by pointing out that it was probably the most dreadfully biased and incompetent refereeing display in the history of the Premier League.

In those days it was clear to me that The Arsenal were being punished because they hired a "Frenchman" and he had a team with the temerity to challenge "one of our own", AF and MU. AW was monikered "The Frenchman" in every news article. NOt so much any more, but it was very real then.

[Alberto Balsam Rodriguez]

.....huge bulk of the media that was pro United and pro Ferguson, or at least too scared to criticise him/them.


There it is. Fergie had the media in his pocket. If he didn't like them, he wouldn't talk to them and he banned them from attending press conference. Interestingly, this is a tactic Apple use to launch or sell their brand.

[Alberto Balsam Rodriguez]

Too easy. I'd insist on him being made to confess his crimes in front of a public show trial before being executed by Arsenal players past and present putting 'competitive' challenges into him until he dies. It should only take a day or so.


Personally, I'd start by peeling layers of skin off him one at a time, pull his hair out a few strands at a time (better get a move on on that one) and then proceed with the sword of damocles inching ever close to him at a very slow rate. Shouldn't take more than a month or two.

[redgunamo]

In those days it was clear to me that The Arsenal were being punished because they hired a "Frenchman" and he had a team with the temerity to challenge "one of our own", AF and MU. AW was monikered "The Frenchman" in every news article. NOt so much any more, but it was very real then.

It's just how we are, Chief; we don't particularly mean anything by it*. Ferguson is always referred to as the "Scot", by the press too.


*Although, it's complicated; A Briton calling someone French is almost certainly intended as a mild insult. However, equally, said Frenchman would proudly accept it as a generous compliment, coming from a Briton.