How sad is it that you're more biased than a bloke that played for both Arsenal and City? Simpson deserved to get sent off for a couple of minor fouls, but Toure didn't for two absolute stonewallers. Keep it up, Blinkers.
We have Norwich, City and Villa after those fixtures too. Spurs have Chelsea, Southampton and Newcastle. There's also the FA cup and Champions League (for us) and the Europey pot (for spurs)
Whatever. They were fouls, the first definitely a yellow. I'm sure you will agree with me though that your penalty today should never have been given ?
It was a clear penalty and Raheem Sterling should've been sent off for his haircut alone, frankly. That's what you'd say, anyway. Are you going to give Bournemouth their points back after Flamini's obvious red wasn't given? Don't tell me, it was just about a yellow and the ref got it right. Right?
At the end of today, Arsenal beat a current top premiership side, who had been reduced to 10 men, 2-1 by a goal in the 95th minute on their home ground. Spurs beat a consistently top premiership side, who had 11 men throughout 2-1 away from home.
No. I can't agree with you about anything. Honestly, I don't think that it was a penalty, but I can see why Clattenburg gave it because of the instructions that the officials are given. Sterling's arm is raised and in an unnatural position and that's what they've been told to look out for. Not a pen, for me, but the two yellows for Toure were absolutely blatant and he missed a load more, too. Far worse decisions, yet there's no controversy over them.
That's what you call humour Anyway, I'm glad to see that you agree with me that it shouldn't have been a penalty.
What a pathetic attempt at point scoring. You think that you've somehow won something by being utterly dishonest. Still, that's what being an Arsenal fan does to you, I guess.
Now you're just blathering Calm down and get over it. You agree with me that it shouldn't have been a penalty. Deal with it
Clattenburg said it was a penalty, so it was a penalty. Just as he said that Toure's two blatant clattering fouls weren't yellow cards, so Toure didn't get a yellow card, Apart from being a pedantic arsehole, what's your problem?
If that Leicester player should have been sent off then so should Toure...the sending off in your match completely changed your match so you got very lucky too Like I said...refs love us norf londoners
You're throwing your toys out of the pram because you can't stand being forced to agree with me and you're calling me a child. Pathetic
How was I forced to agree with you, exactly? I could've just done what you did and dishonestly denied the obvious. You seem to think that you've somehow gained something from it, though I've no idea what.
I think Toure was very lucky not to get booked. The first one was blatant, how he didn't end up in the book I don't know. Probably because it was early in the game and that sort of thing tends to get given early on. The second one was a bit late, but it's debatable whether it was a yellow. It probably should have been a final warning after he'd booked him for the first one. In the normal passage of play, it didn't look too bad, but the replay showed he caught him. That said, it has absolutely nothing to do with the penalty Clattenburg gave you. Only the most myopic of fans would argue that it should have stood. It was a really poor decision that cost City the game in the end.
