You need to edit your post then at least...
But... But... You've literally typed it word for word?! There's no interpretation or extrapolation.Why? You asked me two questions, both of which were wrong.
The only point I've made is that had that handball pen been correctly given, there would not have been that Saka decision to make as everything that follows changes. That's not an assumption, it's a fact.
But... But... You've literally typed it word for word?! There's no interpretation or extrapolation.
You genuinely think this is a fact. Wow.

"everything that follows changes" is what you typed. Now you've shifted the goalposts to the single next event instead of everything yup?

No personal attacksI've just proved it
I can't account for your stupidity mate.
No personal attacks
Thanks

Oh so now you want to review every decision you think is contentious. What shall we include, offsides? throw ins? the way the wind was blowing? Let's not get ridiculous here. There are no assumptions, the first incident of a pen was the handball. The ref blew to the goalie to take the kick, which the goalie did, Gabriel then handballed it from kick off. The ref even admitted he made a mistake, you even accepted in your previous post to the one above that it was a pen. Excuse me if some deluded gooner twitter dickhead behind the goal claims it didn't happen.
The only point I've made is that had that handball pen been correctly given, there would not have been that Saka decision to make as everything that follows changes. That's not an assumption, it's a fact.
Talking up one particular incident whilst simultaneously ignoring the others is selective at best. You’re speculating based on what YOU think would happen if X decision was given and then extrapolating from that. I’m not buying it I’m afraid. Regardless of whether you think the referee messed up or not, the penalty incident with Gabriel isn’t totally black and white, as we’ve seen and heard from analysts throughout the day. I can provide more sources if you want, but I suspect you’re just going to dismiss them anyway, so not sure what the point is.
Mate I'll take you back to what you posted - "Then we’re even for penalty incidents then"
My response was not really, because had the first pen been given it changes the game i.e. all things subsequent to that pen changes so no Saka pen claim. I've said in most of my replies to you that's the point.
You may think that's talking up one incident, but it comes first so naturally it matters more as all things follow from that. So in answer to what you posted, it's not even at all. Had it been the other way around I'd be saying the same for Arsenal, and I dare say you would be too.
That was before I found out Tuchel was - possibly - being untruthful. Ultimately, I don't actually know anymore because no-one's come out to clear anything up. But obviously, when new information comes to light that changes things.
Even if I were to accept this to be true, you assumed Kane would have scored the second penalty to make it 3-1. Granted, his record from the spot is very good, but it's not perfect. And it's totally not unlike him to score and miss in one game...
Also, calling a flagrant elbow to Gabriel's jaw, when he's looked around and saw where he was, as a 'subjective decision' is extremely disingenuous. He should have been off. Kane has this reputation of 'not being that sort of player' when he can be very dirty. It's not the first time he's done something like this, either. Nonetheless, this would have changed the complexion of the game too and for whatever reason, you're choosing to not acknowledge this.
Look, if you think you know what future outcomes would have transpired had all these decisions been given, that's up to you. But as far as I'm aware, you're not a fortune teller and it's all academic at this point.
You can carry on maintaining this line of argument if you want, but like I said, it's immaterial to me because you're picking and choosing what suits your perspective.
) was in response to the Saka penalty claim and the fact Bayern had one earlier. Both penalty claims.Saka's got form:
You must log in or register to see media
It's the Jamie Vardy special. He runs away from the ball and extends his leg into Neuer.
You've got penalties for way less, which is why he keeps doing it. This ref didn't fall for it.
I'll pick you up on this.
The Vardy Special was actually quite unique and remarkably skilled, to the extent that I haven't seen a PL striker do it since they went down.
Vardy did this thing where he would tuck the defender's arm under his own armpit and make it as if he was being pulled back. He would then fling himself to the floor but at such an angle and spin that it looked like he'd been hauled down, a remarkably difficult feat considering he'd be running full pelt in the opposite direction at the time.
I recall a few penalties given against us where he did this. The best was probably the one against Sanchez in their 2-4 defeat.
Saka is bad but Vardy was a different level.