Match Day Thread Arsenal vs Burnley - Matchday Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
As much as I disagree with your policy of genocide in Gaza

You're right about this.

I've had debates in the past with CK about the Middle East and Israel's right to exist (or not), and we didn't see eye-to-eye, so I'm asking at my own peril...but what is his policy of genocide in Gaza?
 
I've had debates in the past with CK about the Middle East and Israel's right to exist (or not), and we didn't see eye-to-eye, so I'm asking at my own peril...but what is his policy of genocide in Gaza?

I'm just messing with him. We have almost diametrically opposed views when it comes to Israel and Palestine

If you'd been on the War thread, you'd have seen some of our months long disagreements.
 
The 'handball' was when we were on the attack, Havertz played it into Saka and Saka tried to flick it around the corner to the onrushing attacking player (can't remember if it was Trossard or Odegaard). The ball hit Tuanzebe's arm, but his arm was close to his side and he was so close to the ball, that there's nothing he could have done to move his arm out the way.

It's not a penalty.

It did not just hit his hand - the defender moved his hand towards the ball to block it.
 
Semantics. Probably/should/ought to/needed to. Whatever. The point is, he was extremely, extremely lucky to not get sent off.

The only two reasons I can think of why VAR didn't intervene is:

1) Paul Tierney had a clear view of the incident, yet still felt a yellow was necessary. They didn't feel like they should intervene if the referee made that decision in real time when he was in a good position.

2) The force in the challenge was minimal, so that maybe rescued him from further punishment.

Like I said, he should have been off and if it was the other way around, I'd be fuming if a player wasn't sent off for a high, late challenge like that. But the above are the only two reasons I can think of as to why Havertz wasn't given his marching orders.

You forgot:

3) The officials in this country are visually and cognitively impaired.
 
I've had debates in the past with CK about the Middle East and Israel's right to exist (or not), and we didn't see eye-to-eye, so I'm asking at my own peril...but what is his policy of genocide in Gaza?

There's no need for you to read hundreds of pages of the War Thread.

The Cliffs Notes summary has it as:

Ponkie is wrong.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: BrunelGunner
Jay, you are kidding me? Literally none of these are penalties. It's a total non-issue.
I agree with this, a non-issue. The only decision we could really complain about was when Hannibal clattered late into Gabriele when the ball had well and truly gone. It should have been a yellow. He got a yellow minutes later for delaying a restart, so they should in theory be down to 10 men. Havertz a lucky man to stay on the pitch too. I was crying for him to be replaced before then because he defo looked leggy and that just looked like a tired/lazy challenge
 
Burnley are a top 50 club in the whole of Europe.
It’s that simple.
Lots of resources and professional coaching means they can, and do, execute a low block that is tough for any team to break down.

Anyone who thought it would be a walkover was dreaming.
It was always 50/50 on whether we’d get the win.
Loooooool, Jay, you are full of jokes at the moment, you are on fire fam !
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Jayramfootball
You lot are ****ing hilarious; top of the league with one game to go, in a CL final - and you’re not enjoying any of it <laugh>

Do you know what most football fans would give to be in your position? If you’re players are as wobbly as you lot, you’re ****ing doomed…
I literally couldn't care less what other fans would die for to be in our position.
 
It's not being silly

Palace will want to win that game

None of it will be easy

"Especially because our manager is a tactical dumbass and has given us a brand of nerve wracking tiresome to watch dullard football"
There, I fixed that for you.
 
He didn't get the ball - he literally just stuck his foot right in the path of Saka's leg which was already swinging to put it in the net..

Keeper did not get a toe to the ball in the Gyokeres incident.

On the handball - the defender made a clear motion towards the ball to block the through pass.

ALL were fairly clear pens in my view - and most of the time they are given.
My take on this, the defender comes in to rob the ball, puts his foot behind the ball but in the path of Saka's kicking leg. Technically the defender can be seen as shielding the ball and that's not a foul, neither is it obstruction because the defender did not impede the attacker's run by stepping across him. But with that said if they had given it as a penalty I wouldn't be surprised, it feels 50/50.

The Gyokeres one I feel he touched the ball BEFORE the keeper kicked it so could very easily be a penalty, however, its not obvious so of we are relying on VAR to give it and its not an obvious error it doesn't surprise me it wasn't given but neither would it surprise me were it given, another 50/50 one.

I didn't see the handball, I was outside watching the grass grow with Citizen Kane by then.
 
So if a defender has the ball pushed past him by an attacker and decides the best way to defend is to dive head long in front of an attacker to stop him getting the ball he just pushed past the defender, then that's OK? As long as he times it right so the attacker runs into him
:emoticon-0140-rofl:

It's really simple, Saka is clear and well in front of the defender and is in the motion of shooting.
The defender cannot possibly get to the ball so sticks his foot in front of Saka... nowhere near the ball and entirely to stop Saka making connection.
This was NOTHING like a situation where an attacker runs into a defender.
No, that would be obstruction Jay. I think this is a grey area because Saka was about to shoot.
 
No, that would be obstruction Jay. I think this is a grey area because Saka was about to shoot.

It's not obstruction though - they have been given as penalties too many times to count.
How many times have you seen a player kick the ball beyond a defender and then run into and fall over a defender who has slid in - NOT on the player, but where the ball is in front. Happens multiple times every season and they are nearly always given as penalties.

We seem to have got confused with the action of the attacker 'running into' a defender.

If a player is running or about to shoot and a defender puts their foot into an area that CAUSES the collision it's a foul and always has been given as a foul.
It's like if someone is walking by a person on the street and they stick out their foot for that person to trip over, it's not the fault of the person walking into the foot, it's an intentional trip.
 
And rightly so, but if there was an annual award for most entitled fans you’re making a strong case for it being won by Arsenal

Please don't include Hothead and Jayram as being representative of all Arsenal fans

Most of us are absolutely thrilled to be in this position and recognise all of the hard work and progress that we've made under Arteta.
 
  • Like
Reactions: straycat_67
Please don't include Hothead and Jayram as being representative of all Arsenal fans

Most of us are absolutely thrilled to be in this position and recognise all of the hard work and progress that we've made under Arteta.

I am delighted with the progress we have made under Arteta.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PINKIE