BBC Home

Explore the BBC

1087 comments

user rating: 3 star

FIVE POINTS CLEAR

Premier League Manchester United
by Misterblue4you (U13917248) 08 November 2009
comment on the article

Chelsea fan in peace.
Well played Man Utd today. You really did deserve something from the game today - for 80% of the game you outplayed Chelsea.
Well done Chelsea for digging in and hanging on. If you are going to win the premiership you have to get through games like this.
When United raised their game, Chelsea really defended well.
United fans - hard lines - Chelsea scored and you didn't.
Please don't go down the 'we were robbed by the ref' route. Accept it. Once again - well played and tough luck.

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Dec 16, 2009

Can't see the video yet pal as I'm at work and it's blocked, what's it of?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2009

Another good point Johhny.
I also hate it when players kick the ball off for supposed injuries or players getting annoyed when the ball isnt kicked off and fans booing.
Whats to stop a player going down when there is attack on against their team, hoping the ball gets kicked out and stops that attack.
It should be up to the ref to stop it.
Players kicking it out, without the refs say so should be penalised.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2009

A bit more controversial than your shirt-off or kicking-ball-away examples, but I was discussing 'shielding the ball out' with another poster a while back. A defender (for sake of this example) can quite happily obstruct an attacker to stop him keeping the ball in play (- in fact, the attacker is often penalised for his efforts to keep the ball live). Surely obstruction should be given by the ref? It's argued that the defender has the right to 'shield', as he's in control of the ball, but how can that be if he hasn't even touched it?

Not sure the alternative would be any better, but I'd like to find out...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2009

Thats a VERY good one.
Sometimes the defender is actually backing into the attacker or i have seen them push the attacker and get the foul!
Its Ridiculous!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 16, 2009

Yep, another good one Djemba - that one really irritates me. The ones where you have someone like, ooh I dunno, Aaron Lennon against someone like say Nemanja Vidic, and obviously physically Lennon has no chance of muscling him off the ball. The official rule is that Vidic must be in close enough distance to touch the ball, but often this is not the case, and you will see the defender actually stop walking forwards, and throw their body into the attacker, go down, and get the free kick. Absolutely ridiculous. Defenders should not be able to shield the ball like this, and I would love to see more free kicks given for this. But we all know it will never happen......

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 17, 2009

It should be obstruction, I hate to see this!

Saw a strange thing last night at the Portsmouth game wher a Pompey defender physically pushes Borinin off the ball (he was playing it) with his hands and nothing is given, Borini runs back and does the same shoulder to shoulder and Pompey get the free-kick. Clattenburgh indicated he'd seen the first incident by waving play on. Inconsistency is the worst offender in football in my opinion.

What a defender gets away with at one end of the pitch an attacker gets penalised for at the other. Defenders get free kicks in the area, yet if they made the same challenge a penalty would rarely be given... strange but true!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 17, 2009

Very true, hate all that!
I hate the inconsistency.
Like United against Pompey (again) when they got a pen for Vidic pulling a Pompey players shirt, well, why then were there not at least 3 more pens for the same thing, maybe more, for both sides!?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 17, 2009

Interesting article on the Times web site about consistency but this paragraph came to my attention:

"Without meaning to be hypocritical, the British do have a complex attitude towards cheating. The eye of the beholder is extraordinarily selective. Only attackers cheat — never defenders. Every excuse is made for defenders; they “stand their ground”, or “just do enough to put the striker off”, or “ease him off the ball”, or “make minimal contact” with his shirt or trailing ankle."

Link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/patrick_barclay/article6955319.ece

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 17, 2009

Good article and so true, it amazes me constantly how they get away with!

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 45.24%
    19 votes
  • 4 7.14%
    3 votes
  • 3 2.38%
    1 votes
  • 2 4.76%
    2 votes
  • 1 40.48%
    17 votes

average rating:
3.12 from 42 votes