"Punditry in this country is shit"

[Flojo]

I've heard a lot of managers say ' yeah that was a bad tackle by our player, I've got no complaints' or ' yeah I think the ref got it wrong but they even themselves out over the course of a season' which is fair enough.

Nobody is looking for Wenger to come out and criticise his players, it's just the way he insult's people's intelligence by saying ' I didn't see it' time and time again that pisses people off. The backlash is warranted anyway because it wasn't a bad tackle.

We talking about broken leg tackles, not offside goals or incorrect ref decisions. You cant expect Wenger to say "fair enough".

You insult your own intelligence if you believe if actually didnt see it.

Its a tackle that he didnt need to make, he is never getting to the ball. Never in a million years.

I know he's chatting sh*t when he says 'I didn't see it' and thats why when I see him moaning about similar incidents I instantly think 'shut up'. lol it was more or less a 50-50 and he had every right to go for it, you Arsenal fans aren't even trying to be subjective about it.

Had it not resulted in a serious injury I'm 100% certain that Wenger wouldn't have highlighted the tackle in his post match interview.

[TF S4DK]

As long as we win and none of our players get hurt, Wenger rarely comments on every aspect of a game, as I guess there is no need. A player has obviously been seriously injured and he is entitled to comment, when asked. Which he was...

Same way Coyle was after Gallas tackle and the same way in the aftermath of the coverage the Gallas tackle received Wenger questioned why wasnt the same attention showed to the tackles Bolton made over the same (keyword same) back to back games, but again like I said we won both games and none of his players got hurt. So why harp on...

I read practically ever quotable Wenger makes and its safe to say (but he wont) hat he thinks Shawcross cant tackle, had his eyes closed, Stoke along with other clubs/players in the league have a reckless approach to playing football, and in regards to this topic, its a approach that stems from a combination of various things, but notably tactical analysis from ex-player pundits.

[BATTY BOY BUM BANDIT]

Are people trying to actually say it wasnt a bad tackle?

[Flojo]

Commenting is fair enough just don't expect people to recognise the merit in what you're saying when you've been so dismissive when the shoe's on the other foot.

On the Gallas tackle he said 'on first view to me it didn't look very bad'

On the Shawcross tackle 'The tackle from Shawcross was horrendous'

After having the chance to see both again he hasn't changed his opinion. Pundits have rightfully pointed out that Wenger's comment on Shawcross was wrong so it's a just backlash.

[TF S4DK]

I dont think he was dismissive on Gallas' tackle...

Immediately after he said...

It didn't look dirty from outside. What I saw was two or three players, it was not only William in there. I think Fabregas was in there at the start as well. I don't know, I have to watch it again. I am sorry if the tackle was not good, really. There are two things I have heard just now: one, that he [Owen Coyle] was not happy with the tackle, and I am sorry if the tackle was not a good one. I apologise for that. The second thing, that he [Coyle] was not happy that we carried on playing, I think that is unfair because the players who went on, they did not know what was happening behind. When the player went down, they did not know if he got up again because when you win the ball you go forward, you don't know what is happening behind you. That is why I don't believe you can kick the ball out every time a player is down when you win the ball. That means every time you win the ball when you are 2-1 down, every time a player goes down you have to kick the ball out - it's impossible. That's why they changed the rule.

Days later & obviously after rewatching he said...

"I do not want to develop any paranoia, but there was too much made about this incident. It was a mistimed challenge but without any intention to harm the player. What is more funny is that, when we get kicked, some people say before the game 'we know how to play Arsenal, we have to kick them' and nobody in the whole country is upset by that. I am always absolutely amazed that people get away with it. When we get kicked and lose the game, the question I get from the press is 'oh, you did not fancy that'. But nobody is upset or shocked by it. When we are kicked they find that it is absolutely all right. I said after the Bolton game if Gallas has injured the player, we are sorry. We will have a look at the tackle and if it is malicious we will come out and make a statement. We looked at it carefully and we saw that it was just a mistimed tackle. That is why we didn't see why such a story should flare up and make a national issue if the intention of the player was completely right. If you ask anywhere in the world, do Arsenal play fair football? You will get the same answer in every single country. That is what we try to achieve. Look at the Fair Play League - Arsenal are top. That is the best answer you can give."

"Fabregas had two clear penalties at Bolton and one or two here, at Bolton there was what happened after [the penalty claim] when they [bolton players] pulled his hair and stood on his neck. Why is no-one sensitive to that? Does that not make a story? You wonder why. We saw it three or four times when we watched the tape afterwards and we spoke about it. How can that not be a penalty? Today, we are all brainwashed by one or two main medias who decide what we have to talk about and we talk about that. When it becomes the main story you have to give your opinion about it. I can accept that but it doesn't always mean they are right. Some incidents they [the media] have not picked are sometimes more important than that. But I don't get upset any more. It just glides over me."

Coyle days later admitted he might have over-reacted after the Arsenal game, and a huge part of that IMO will be because days later he is aware Davies hasnt sustained serious injury. If he had I doubt Coyle would have taken it back. Gallas would have been hit with a 3 game FA ban and Wenger stance might/probably have been softer.

With the Shawcross tackle, Wenger wont take it back I guess cos its his opinion and more importantly cos his player is injured for at least the rest of the season and in regards to this topic he stated...

"I stand by what I said 100 percent, I knew exactly what would happen the whole week, that was quite easy to predict but I don't know what is to be added to that. It is important to focus on the future, help Aaron Ramsey and let people talk. We don't want to come back too much on headlines that will create controversy. It doesn't help Aaron, it doesn't help football and we don't go any further any more. I lived for 20 years abroad and I know what it means. I am not always 100 per cent right but I am entitled to have my opinion no matter where I work. I love the commitment of the English game. I don't want to change that and it makes the game even more attractive. I am 100 percent behind the commitment. But high commitment demands fair intention as well."

[BATTY BOY BUM BANDIT]

I dont like admitting it but Wenger is chattin utter sense.

Since when has it been ok to kick someone in the shin? Accidental or not is irrelavent. Intent or not is irrelevant. Kicking someone in the shin is always a foul.

The pundits wind me up as well, when they say 'it shouldnt have been a penno because he knocked the ball near enough out of play anyway' Thats another load of bullshit.

[MetaFives]

The tackle from Shawcross was very very careless.

Look at how he goes in all without a care in the world.

No way was he going to win the ball with that tackle.

[Guest Lens]

shawcross was the 1 who started with the ball of course he's gonna go in to maintain possession.

[NO SUNSHINE]

I thought the debate was basically over whether the tackle was malicious or not.

Are people saying that they don't believe it was a badly mistimed, lunging challenge for the ball?

[TF S4DK]

shawcross was the 1 who started with the ball of course he's gonna go in to maintain possession.

He'd lost posession of the ball.

[Guest Lens]

shawcross was the 1 who started with the ball of course he's gonna go in to maintain possession.

He'd lost posession of the ball.

are You trying to imply that before touching the ball, ramsey was in possession?

[TF S4DK]

I thought the debate was basically over whether the tackle was malicious or not.

Wenger said after the game the tackle was horrendous, then later said proving intend is impossible, I dont think he ever used the word malicious.

[TF S4DK]

shawcross was the 1 who started with the ball of course he's gonna go in to maintain possession.

He'd lost posession of the ball.

are You trying to imply that before touching the ball, ramsey was in possession?

From Nasri plays a pass into Bendtner, nobody has actual possesion of the ball, as poor touches by both (Bendtner & Shawcross) mean they never truly retain the ball, its scrappy. The difference is when Shawcross takes the ball of Bendtner, Bendtner doesnt make an attempt to win a ball he obviously cant. Shawcross knows Ramsey has won the ball, Ramsey is too quick for him in terms of pace, touch and thought of brain, which is why Shawcross ends up just lunging and taking the man, he obviously doesnt mean to break his leg, but he knows he cant pull out of the challenge as it would show a lack of "commitment", yet then becomes reckless. This is why many argue that tackling is an art and that for example lets just say Ramsey somehow pulls his leg out, do you really think Shawcross would have had control of the ball with that lung? Where as Ramsey was probably thinking about his thru ball to Eboue when next thing he knows his leg aint there.

[Guest Intervention]

Don't necessarily agree on everything he said. Not gonna get into it.

But

What you have instead is a career in the media which is just an easy way for old players to earn a crust.

LMFAO

[Sinister]

TBH this isn't really about specifics.

Wengers been pissing off people for a while now in interviews, it's been building up.

It's just culminated in his reaction to the Ramsey Tackle.

[Guest Lens]

TBH this isn't really about specifics.

Wengers been pissing off people for a while now in interviews, it's been building up.

It's just culminated in his reaction to the Ramsey Tackle.

agreed

so damn bitchy. if You dnt wana be out tackled don't field a physically weak team. not hard...

[Guest Intervention]

LMAO

it was a bad tackle.

He has every right to complain about it

He broke a young boys leg by tackling at full pace and full power and going over the top of the ball

BAD. TACKLE.

Its truly feeble to try and make the issue about Wenger having a small or physically unimposing team. SMH.

If your team had had 3 players get double fractures from reckless tackles in 4 years you too would have something to say about it.

[Guest Lens]

LMAO

it was a bad tackle.

He has every right to complain about it

He broke a young boys leg by tackling at full pace and full power and going over the top of the ball

BAD. TACKLE.

Its truly feeble to try and make the issue about Wenger having a small or physically unimposing team. SMH.

If your team had had 3 players get double fractures from reckless tackles in 4 years you too would have something to say about it.

and if You were the manager of a team of weak players and saw that it encouraged teams to tackle You harder, You would field physically stronger players.

and it wasnt a bad tackle, it was a bad collision as 2 players competed in a 50/50 for the ball

[Guest Intervention]

He caught him above the ankle you twat of course it was a bad tackle.

if anyone serious wants to have a debate about it I'll gladly indulge you.

[Guest Lens]

He caught him above the ankle you twat of course it was a bad tackle.

if anyone serious wants to have a debate about it I'll gladly indulge you.

i was disputing the word tackle being used, not bad. it was a bad collision

[TF S4DK]

A collision that didnt need to happened, its not a 50/50 ball.

[Guest Intervention]

No.

A collision is a coming together

Ramsey was quicker than Shawcross and poked the ball away from him, Shawcross was aware that he didnt have the pace to beat ramsey to the ball after his heavy touch so compensated for it by swinging his leg with as much power and pace as possible toward the ball, he got nowhere near it and went through ramseys leg just above the ankle.

A collision is two players running into eachother, this was not a collision. A 50/50 tackle is when it is FIFTY, FIFTY. NOT. 0/100

Ramsey at this point has already touched the ball away. Shawcross could effectively lessen the power of the swing and TRY to pull out but he doesnt, it was a bad error in judgement and a bad tackle. Not a collision. Not a simple mistake resulting from a 50/50, a bad tackle.

Not malicious in anyway, just a big lump of a defender being overzelous in his attempt to clean out another player. He won't be so quick to do it again.

for the record I am a big fan of Shawcross. A little peeved we sold him.

[n/a]

The backlash is warranted anyway because it wasn't a bad tackle.

[Guest Lens]

No.

A collision is a coming together

Ramsey was quicker than Shawcross and poked the ball away from him, Shawcross was aware that he didnt have the pace to beat ramsey to the ball after his heavy touch so compensated for it by swinging his leg with as much power and pace as possible toward the ball, he got nowhere near it and went through ramseys leg just above the ankle.

A collision is two players running into eachother, this was not a collision. A 50/50 tackle is when it is FIFTY, FIFTY. NOT. 0/100

Ramsey at this point has already touched the ball away. Shawcross could effectively lessen the power of the swing and TRY to pull out but he doesnt, it was a bad error in judgement and a bad tackle. Not a collision. Not a simple mistake resulting from a 50/50, a bad tackle.

Not malicious in anyway, just a big lump of a defender being overzelous in his attempt to clean out another player. He won't be so quick to do it again.

for the record I am a big fan of Shawcross. A little peeved we sold him.

his feet are both of the ground, what are You asking him to do at this point, at the speed of a football game in progress, not slowed down on camera?

[Guest Intervention]

Both feet off the ground going into a tackle?

Why are you still arguing?

How flojo can say it wasnt a bad tackle when it was actually a foul is as bizarre as it is contradictory.