Rival Watch Thread Watch

Sunday Supplement on Sky Sports.

http://www1.skysports.com/watch/tv-...spitting-at-newcastles-papiss-cisse-troubling

Patrick Barclay, "I'm not saying yes or no. All I'm saying is that I'm very troubled by it and have been ever since it happened. I've watched it and cannot see there's a man guilty of a six-match offence."



Martin Samuels.

"Jonny Evans is banned for six matches because The FA doesn't have that wonderful burden of proof thing that everyone thought was so magnificent," he said.





Pair of united are kissers, the burden of proof is glaringly clear.

 

To be fair koscielny is the best defender we have had at the club for years. We have a much better record with him in the team and he's played for us against the best strikers in the world and done well. Overall our defense has been very shaky this season with so many injuries to the backline and personnel being constantly changed, but over the last few years koscielny has played very well for us. You lot wanted vermaelen who wasn't as good as him.

As for Ramsey he was arguably the best CM in the league last season but has had injury problems this year. Not sure what your point is with him?

 

i read this..... i was utterly shocked two white men lined up behind another white man especially if said white man played for united.

Barclay in particular is in one breath distancing himself from it and on the other trying to back the guy. very funny... its like he's afraid if he says anything he'll lose his inside line at utd but if he says nothing his rivals on the show will make him too bad.

samuels seems to be in utter denial cos evans like terry flat denied direct video evidence

 

This (but being an armchair plastic, I haven't been in one myself). I don't see why its ok when a team gets promoted, or a lower league team wins in one of the earlier rounds, but when Villa, after a difficult season, beat their local rivals in the cup to win a trip to Wembley, it's suddenly bang out of order?

That said, there should be punishments for doing it before the game was over, ripping up seats, and biting Delph (not sure if anything else happened).

 

It's not ok on any occasion, imo.
Pitch invasions are reminiscent of a much uglier time in football and were a part of scenes which led the authorities to ever more Draconian measures of crowd control- and we all know where they led.
This time it might have been good-natured (though whether it was entirely so is open to question), but what if it had not been?
Scenes like this demonstrate to the authorities that they have little or no control over a crowd if it chooses to behave that way, and with a reactionary, people-pleasing Government always likely to stick their oar in we don't know what the repercussions might be.
What of the officials and the opposition players still on the pitch when it happens? There may be no malice intended towards them, but they can't know that and it's a very intimidating situation to be in. What if some idiots use the general chaos to have a go?
This one may have been ok, but it could set a precedent we don't need and draw attention from quarters we don't want.

 

for me there are 3 issues here.

1. there are never enough stewards to actually control a crowd. football is actually run on a trust system 99% of the crowd is trusted and te stewards are there to remove the 1% to keep the stairways clear and such. and of course to catch streakers. if teams think running on the pitch is ok then the only way to control it is fencing.

2. its never "ok" its just cos nobody gives a crap when 3k fans in league 2 run on. the reality is when 40k people start at it then youve a big issue as theres no room and no way to police it or keep people safe at all.. crush injuries are highly possible. ask yourself.... at a 20 year old its great fun isn't it... all you and yer mates etc etc. great... roll yourself forward 10 years and dare bring your 10 year old or 5 year old to same game.... would you let your ten year old run off down there no you would not.... not unless you are nuts. again league 2... authorities don't care they should but they dont

3. there are a bunch of players, 11 from rival team plus subs, plus staff down there plus police, stewards and then 4 officals too.. the players are on 100k a week... if nothing happens the insurance companies won't cover anything so the first sign of a slap the whole thing comes down like a house of cards and money says fences

again..... its not the 80s where violence might be rip up seats or fight with fists.. all it takes is one knife and football has a black day... all it needs is one terrorist having an idea.


so............ lets get real. i bet it was great fun for the organizers of this... younger men who dont give a crap about what happens to their club. i fully expect villa to have a game behind closed doors here. thats a huge cost to them. i fully expect their wembley allocation to be halved and the whining to start but reality says wembley stewards dont want the hassle. if football want to be about more than young men acting the mick and bring families into grounds this **** isn't on end of....

 

at least one west brom player was hit... if they bit thier own captain you know there was an organised element to this that orchestrated both... i don't believe either was spontaneous

all it takes is one guy with a black flag under a football shirt given the total lack imo of searches that goes on at football to create a huge tragedy. we will all suffer if security ends up like an airport and we sit behind fences in all seater stadiums.

 

I hadn't heard that.
If it's true then there's no more argument as far as I'm concerned.

 

1) Agree completely. It's either fences or you run the risk. In England, we have no fences and have the odd pitch invasion. In Germany, they have fences and don't (and there was huge uproar a couple of years ago when Fortuna Düsseldorf fans did invade the pitch after they won the promotion play-off).

2) While 3k is more manageable than 40k, it's would still be far too many to properly manage. There's no real difference.

 

#fullkitdriver

 

He should keep his eyes on the road or otherwise it will be car crash TV

And I like him, dont want him to crash

 

So who do you guys prefer to go through out of us and Arsenal?

 

Arsenal, I never want man yoo to win.

 

Don't be daft, Dave.

 

I cannot speak for all of my fellow Blues, but generally I think Chelsea fans have no preference between those two.
Asking Liverpool fans however, is a bit daft

 

Harsh to call it "daft" they might want to beat us in the final should we get there for Gerrards last game

 

It's a paradox.

I would rather face you in a later round than Arsenal. But you can only get there by winning which I don't want.

please log in to view this image

 

Very rare I want them to win but I wouldn't say never. For example, what if we were one point behind the league leaders going into the final game of the season and Man Utd were player said leaders?

I would prefer us to face Man Utd in the final (assuming we make it to the final) so I guess I'll have to say the mancs. Plus, its preventing them being completely part-time too, they'd win the league if that happened