1) Of course it was normal, if you don't see players get caught after playing the ball a lot then you don't watch or play much football. 2) It wasn't "particularly bad". Take some deep breaths and read slowly before replying. Also you might need to reconsider the petty insults. 3) And there we agree, it wasn't a good challenge, otherwise he would've got the ball and it wouldn't have been a foul. 4) Given the rest of your posts on this, I'll take that with a pinch of salt.
It's a focus for the bickering though, HD! I'd rather contain it in one place, to be honest. As long as it doesn't become personal, I'm going to leave it alone, at the moment. Keep it clean though please, everyone.
Nobody said that I have more respect for Frimpong - like Parker he 'did' his opponent and had the good grace not to pretend he didnt.
To be fair, whilst there is a certain amount of bickering going on (which is, perhaps, inevitable, given the circumstances), it has been fairly clean and good natured. Plus, it's not often that I get to call TheTruthHurts a clown on a cross-thread, and I am rather enjoying it
Jayram, I agree with you, in that it's just degenerated into a childish squabble. The fact is late tackles happen. Once a player, who in this case was probably tired, anyway, has committed to the challenge, it's virtually impossible to pull out. I don't believe Parker is a dirty player, in that he goes out to harm fellow professionals. He completely mistimed the tackle - knew what was coming- and accepted his fate without any argument. Tackling is what Parker's game is all about. It's inevitable that he's going to get more cards than most. If you took that out of his game, he wouldn't be the player he is.
You're mistaking tactics for the line-up, for some reason. Against Newcastle we came out of the blocks at 100mph and attacked them, taking easy advantage of their high line at the back. Against your lot we defended deep and didn't pressurise those in possession of the ball, as the plan was clearly an attempt to isolate your two centre-halves, in the first half at least. Kranjcar is totally incapable of playing that style of football and completely at ease playing the creative, attacking style that we used against Newcastle. When playing a counter-attacking game, it's clear to virtually anyone that the pacey and more defensively capable Lennon would've been a far superior choice. Unless you can say something a little more valid than, "U iz crud, we waz wikked", then I'm going to have to believe that my assessment is more accurate than yours. Sorry.
Now suffering in spain ... why go to N17 ?? because i was advised by my new boss if i play my cards right and own a dog then i wont be paying any taxes ... easy peasy really. Parkers foul was bad but you see worse every week, it got the rewards deserved and tv gor away relatively undamaged, we move on ...
No it was not accidental. He went into a challenge with a complete disregard for Ramsey. He didnt mean to break his leg, but it certainly was not an accident.
hoddle is god ... you get to call me a clown ... wey hey !! .. i might well be who knows .. but what we do know is we get to call you ... a "spurs supporter" ... now thats funny
Well, that must be right. After all, it was proved in court. Yes, I agree, Parker got what he deserved. He knew it, and knew he had to walk. Which is more than many would have done.
**** me How **** would football be if nobody tried to win the ball? They aren't robots who can time every single thing 100% accurately ffs, they're humans. It has nothing to do with being 'acceptable' or not, the fact is Shawcross tried to win the ball and accidently broke Ramsey's leg. It's a terrible thing to happen but it was an ACCIDENT. Anyway I couldn't give two ****s about the Shawcross thing, the point is Parker was right for apologising for his mistimed challenge.
you came out of the blocks fast against us too - and went 2-0 up against our high and disorganised back line. The difference was that we just battered you from 30 minutes on. You obviously dont realise how stupid it sounds to talk the way you are after being trounced 5-2 (which was very flattering to Spurs by the way). You picked exactly the same line up as the game against Newcastle - whats more credible, that it just didnt work against us on the day, or that Harry used the same players and completely different tactics?
Rubbish - you can go for tackles you have a chance of winning. Thats fair enough. But when you just dive in no matter what the odds of winning the ball, you cant cry (as Shawcross did) about it being an accident afterwards.
i do recall wathing tv and saying shake his hands a few guys near me had other views but at the end of the day if it was offered (sincerely) it must be accepted ... this season has seen enough unsportsman ship conduct and ref baiting to send guys off to last 10 seasons ... "not every foul is a red card and not every foul is aimed at breaking legs" unless you train at stoke ..... (er sorry trying to be funny again) have we debated why our gk got way with nothing (even if he did not touch bale) the decision should have been easy for the ref .. he made two errors and we paid ofr one .... fact was if he got sent off it would not have mattered as he did not touch the ball again after the pen ..... hope he paid for his seat.
No, we didn't. We came out and sat back, hitting you on the break and having virtually no meaningful possession, despite our two goal lead. Did you even watch the game? The latter. If you have another opportunity to see the match, then watch how far our midfield drops off, inviting yours forward. There's no pressure on the ball until the last third. That's clearly a tactical decision.
