Liverpool v Arsenal

[OB1theGeordie]

Now that has to stick in the throat a bit.

Two similar penalty incidents and both go against you.

Gotta feel sorry for Arsenal. Rather unlucky.

[Spindryer]

I saw the first half only, didnt see the second but i heard it was a cracking last 45 mins. Tbh we only have ourselves to blame as we should of finished the job before we even got to Anfield.

GG

[Infidel]

i really dont think that it was a penalty, there was minimal contact there, babel went down extremely easily, there was no contact with his legs to trip him up and only a slight nudge in the back and he went flailing through the air as if he taken a 50.cal to the chest. blatant dive imo though i can see why the referee gave it, the arsenal guy behind him (gallas maybe?) was in the air.

the fact is they should never have allowed a long punt forward to be flicked on and scored for liverpools second in the first place.

amazing run by walcot to set up arsenals second though.

[NeoKubrick]

****ing robbed: no other description to describe it.

[Bonzo]

Shame it was ruined by the match officials.

[Infidel]

Shame it was ruined by the match officials.

as is so often the case nowadays

the trouble is that TV coverage scrutinises every decision they make from various different angles at slower speeds multiple times, of course its going to show up some mistakes.

tbh when i saw the penalty in real time i instantly thought oh **** no, penalty! it was only after seeing it a couple of times i realised it was actually a blatant dive.

[Pie In The Sky]

****ing robbed: no other description to describe it.

Really? I agree that it should not have been a penalty, but tbh Liverpool were the better team overall. As a neutral spectator I thought it was a great game, very entertaining. And although some referee decisions were poor, the team who were playing the better football won.

[Gaskin]

Pie what are you on? You're the only person bar Liverpool fans I've heard say Liverpool deserved it. Shouldn't have been a penalty, would have been 2-2, game would have gone from there and most likely headed toward Arsenal's victory.

[Pie In The Sky]

I'm on many a thing Gaskin...
I agree the penalty was not deserved, and yes that would have made it 2-2 and Arsenal would go through on away goals. But I can't honestly say that if Arsenal had won, they deserved it. Because tbh for the majority of the game Liverpool were in control. It was a close game, granted, but I think Liverpool were the better team so deserved to win, even if they didnt deserve the penalty.

[NeoKubrick]

Really? I agree that it should not have been a penalty, but tbh Liverpool were the better team overall. As a neutral spectator I thought it was a great game, very entertaining. And although some referee decisions were poor, the team who were playing the better football won.

Do you? Do you think my spouting a word like 'neutral', your opinion is going to change dramatically from one of a hack to one of someone who can understand 'better' football?

Do you think that playing the better football is lumping the football up to Crouch all game? That's what Liverpool did all game. In fact, name one goal which wasn't from a cross or a high ball? Yes, the penalty. Hypia scored from a cross; Torres scored from a Crouch knock-on (Torres did well), and Babel scored from a lump up from Kuyt. Let's extend it further: first leg, who played the better football? Was putting ten men behind the ball "better" football? Sorry, son, but I watch football to watch football, not some lumps of stacked-**** donkeying around the pitch and kicking up the ball to other lumps of stacked-**** and hope for the best. I want to watch players control the ball and pass to other players and players who utilize space as a weapon, not, ground to be covered.

"Better" football hinged upon a penalty decision - aside from the goals, you couldn't give one example of where Liverpool created a single clear-cut opportunity as Arsenal did twice in the second half (Ad's miss of the season, and Eboue's selfish shot which he should have squared to Addy). So, their "better" football produced **** all.


You haven't a clue about football, and now you've demonstrated it. You're just another kid grown up on a diet of English football, where intelligent players and matadors are liabilities. And you'll sit there rubbing your lil' noggin' wondering why England aren't going to Euro 2008.


Pie, I really want you to state that Liverpool played the better football by lumping the ball up to Crouch every single time. Just to confirm it. :)

[Roadpog]

Kubrick you a arsenal fan by anychance? :)

I can't comment on this match but from what i've heard in this convo. It seems both teams should of won :S

[Pie In The Sky]

Easy, no need to get vicious.
I will not put forward my arguments as I know that you are just as stubborn as me, and it will not be fun for anyone.
However I do resent this:

You're just another kid grown up on a diet of English football, where intelligent players and matadors are liabilities. And you'll sit there rubbing your lil' noggin' wondering why England aren't going to Euro 2008.

To be quite honest, **** you. I stated my opinion. I may be some 'little kid who knows nothing about football', but you are most certainly not a wise football-guru who can talk down to me.
Show some respect, 'son'.

[NeoKubrick]

Kubrick you a arsenal fan by anychance? :)

I can't comment on this match but from what i've heard in this convo. It seems both teams should of won :S
Yes I am an Arsenal fan. Try to detect bias if you want, instead of trying to disregard by opinion by virtue of establishing that I'm an Arsenal fan, okay?

I mean, are you saying that the content of my argument should be disregarded because I'm an Arsenal fan and Pie's shouldn't because he proclaims himself a "neutral"?

[Spindryer]

Kubrick i know like me your feeling the pain of our side not going through but the fact of the matter Arsenal didnt do enough in both games to "deserve" to go through. Playing fancy football is nice to watch but it doesn't win games.

I think pie was more than fair in his statement, and from what i saw in the first half Arsenal spent the first 20 minutes playing the sort of football that would win them the game with ease and then the last 25 minutes on the back foot while Liverpool toyed with them, which is why Liverpool got it level. As i said before Arsenal should of took their chances and put this tie to bed from home.

We (Arsenal) need a decent striker who can put the ball in the back of the net when he gets the chance, not the Abi we have who needs 5 chances to put 1 away.

[Gaskin]

James, you didn't watch the second half of the game. We DID do enough to win, we had it in the bag at 2-2. If it weren't for a awful penalty decision Arsenal 'should' have gone on to win, heck they might have even got another goal with momentum.

[Spindryer]

The bitter taste is in my mouth as well trust me, and maybe its because i didn't see the second half which is making the pain a little more easy to take. All that being said everyone is entitled to there opinions and however in-just it feels that Liverpool won we as a team have to look at our own problems before blaming everything else.

for instance i would like to know why Liverpool who are known from being most deadly from set pieces and corners were aloud all the space in the world (the first goal especially) to use it.

[Roadpog]

I feel sorry for that referee i heard about that penalty decision.
My dad screamed shouting PENALTY!!! so obivously at that angle it must of looked it. But upon further inspection it wasn't.
Passing a ball around is good but obviously it just didn't win the game for them.
Not a problem though its only a bag of air. And to be fair Arsenal should of lost cause i hate Southern clubs =]

[Spindryer]

You see that ^^ opinion is worth jumping on guys (Y).

[Roadpog]

You see that ^^ opinion is worth jumping on guys (Y).

Yea well. I dont really care that much for football. More of a F1 fan.
Seems to me though everyone is pretty much crying about Arsenal loosing. And to be fair earlier on in the Premier league it started to slip it really was inevitable.
Just heard that Liverpool deserved to win over MSN From an Arsenal fan. Just goes to show everyone think that liverpool deserved to win it.

[NeoKubrick]

Easy, no need to get vicious.
I will not put forward my arguments as I know that you are just as stubborn as me, and it will not be fun for anyone.
However I do resent this:



To be quite honest, **** you. I stated my opinion. I may be some 'little kid who knows nothing about football', but you are most certainly not a wise football-guru who can talk down to me.
Show some respect, 'son'.

It's the truth. If you think that Liverpool played the "better" football by playing ten men behind the ball in the first leg and lumping the ball up to Crouch in the second, then that quote you resent so much (too close to the bone?) applies to you, and many other football fans in Britain. And I want you to confirm the statement in the last post I directed towards you. Cheers.


Spin, Pie has said that Liverpool deserved it, and that's what I'm objecting to. They didn't deserve it; Arsenal missed opportunities and Senderos gifted both Hyypia and Torres too much space for both goals, but what did Liverpool do to deserve the game? Nothing. Arsenal had all the invention and fashioned more chances than Liverpool did - **** opinion, that's a fact. And if it weren't for two penalty decisions, both absolutely incorrect, Liverpool would have been out - and this kid says Liverpool played the better football and deserved the win?


Hey, Roadpog, you forgot to reply to my post directed at you? If you want to contribute to this thread, contribute, and be courtesy enough to answer my question as I was courtesy enough to answer yours. :)

[Infidel]

there is no doubt that arsenal play the best "football" in the premiership. their passing and moving when they're playing well is second to none and beautiful to watch. but when they're not playing well they dont grind out victories like ManU and Chelsea do, they have no real Plan B. ManU can play some great football but when the situation arises and they're not at their best they still grind out victories through long balls etc. Chelsea only ever play good football after they're 2-0 up through pumping the ball up to drogba, same with liverpool, long balls nothing else really, boring and rubbish football to watch but it gets the job done.

when arsenal play their best there is no team in the premiership that can get close save for maybe ManU, but no team can play their best in every game of the season which is why you see ManU and Chelsea guning for the title whilst Arsenal have dropped off. for the top teams its not how good you are when you're at your best that decides the league, its how good you are at your worst.

and Neo i completely agree with your opinion of the English national side, it plays terrible football and yet the ignorant football fans accept it and think that its a great way to play and support anyway. i for one was REALLY cheering on Croatia when we played them.

[Terbinator]

I feel sorry for that referee i heard about that penalty decision.
My dad screamed shouting PENALTY!!! so obivously at that angle it must of looked it. But upon further inspection it wasn't.
Passing a ball around is good but obviously it just didn't win the game for them.
Not a problem though its only a bag of air. And to be fair Arsenal should of lost cause i hate Southern clubs =]

u gotta love it

[Roadpog]

-.-' I dont think any opinion should be disregarded but to what u just put in your post PROVES Liverpool deserved to win it.
Arsenal missed opportunities and Senderos gifted both Hyypia and Torres too much space for both goals
Liverpool catapalises on this and got the two goals. So they deserved it for exploiting what you did wrong.

And if your going to go all defensive theres no point posting in this thread is there. As obviously Arsenal lost End of. Liverpool porbably should win it and hopefully they will.

Arsenal had a unlucky game with the Ref and all but it happens in most games, just got to be a man and face it.

[NeoKubrick]

there is no doubt that arsenal play the best "football" in the premiership. their passing and moving when they're playing well is second to none and beautiful to watch. but when they're not playing well they dont grind out victories like ManU and Chelsea do, they have no real Plan B. ManU can play some great football but when the situation arises and they're not at their best they still grind out victories through long balls etc. Chelsea only ever play good football after they're 2-0 up through pumping the ball up to drogba, same with liverpool, long balls nothing else really, boring and rubbish football to watch but it gets the job done.

when arsenal play their best there is no team in the premiership that can get close save for maybe ManU, but no team can play their best in every game of the season which is why you see ManU and Chelsea guning for the title whilst Arsenal have dropped off. for the top teams its not how good you are when you're at your best that decides the league, its how good you are at your worst.

Er, that doesn't stand up to facts. Look back earlier in the season, and see all the results Arsenal grind out, and with Addy, Arsenal now do have the option to go route one. Arsenal fell by the wayside because of a lack of depth in the squad: Van Persie and Rosicky have been out for much of the season, and don't forget these are two important and senior players for Arsenal; Eduardo got that horrific injury when we were lacking strikers already; Sagna was out. And, let's not forget that Liverpool only got back into the game because Flamini went off, and we only had a shadow of his former self in Gilberto.

[Terbinator]

atleast arsenal can attempt to win the league now by being able to put there eggs in one basket

[Infidel]

Arsenal made a couple of mistakes and all credit to Liverpool for taking advantage of them but to me the way they play is a boring and completely appaling way to play. arsenal are the better footballing team its just the fact that two bad decisions took the game away from them. liverpool did not play the better "football" they just did enough to stay in it and let bad decisions give them the win.

[Spindryer]

As a wise man once said "You can only beat whats put in front of you" and if Liverpool take what half chances they had and Arsenal couldn't hit at barn door at times then im not argue that Arsenal out right deserved to win.

I honestly believe we have problems at Arsenal and touch on what Infidel quite rightly said about when we play our best we our untouchable but were not, we cant seem to play simple hard football which is missing from our game.

Any team should be aiming towards winning games, the fancy football will come with that, not the other way round.

[NeoKubrick]

-.-' I dont think any opinion should be disregarded but to what u just put in your post PROVES Liverpool deserved to win it.

Liverpool catapalises on this and got the two goals. So they deserved it for exploiting what you did wrong.

And if your going to go all defensive theres no point posting in this thread is there. As obviously Arsenal lost End of. Liverpool porbably should win it and hopefully they will.

Arsenal had a unlucky game with the Ref and all but it happens in most games, just got to be a man and face it.

Pog, listen, for Liverpool to deserve something, they have to prove they earned it for them to deserve it (simple concept eh?). Now, count the amount of times Liverpool exploited what we did wrong: twice. How many did we score? Yes, so that brand of 'goal' logic is predicated upon the penalty Liverpool scored. Did they deserve that penalty? Well, you'd have to look at the match as a whole to see that, and Liverpool didn't create one clear-cut chance.

No point in posting? You came in here all smug trying to imply some sort of bias because I support Arsenal. I ridiculed your ridiculous implication as it ignores the argument (you know the actual statements made) and makes anything said by a "neutral" logical, which it doesn't. You ignored my post with your tails between your legs because of your failed attempt. And the irony of your saying "be a man and face it": you weren't man enough to face the fact that I pointed out your laughable attempt, and answer my question, or admit the error of your post.

Defensive enough? :)

[Infidel]

Er, that doesn't stand up to facts. Look back earlier in the season, and see all the results Arsenal grind out, and with Addy, Arsenal now do have the option to go route one. Arsenal fell by the wayside because of a lack of depth in the squad: Van Persie and Rosicky have been out for much of the season, and don't forget these are two important and senior players for Arsenal; Eduardo got that horrific injury when we were lacking strikers already; Sagna was out. And, let's not forget that Liverpool only got back into the game because Flamini went off, and we only had a shadow of his former self in Gilberto.

im not saying they cant grind out results but when a team gets in to them and disrupts their way of playing they find it difficult to adapt and turn a draw in to a win which makes all the difference. They seem to lack that killer touch in the final third at times in crucial and difficult games where they try and go one pass too many to set up the perfect finish. a little more decisiveness and taking a shot early when its not quite working could go a long way. arsenal dont like to go with the option of route one football and often when all a team is doing is trying to block them out it doesnt work. the portsmouth game which was a 1-1 draw i believe is a perfect example of them getting level and shutting us out.

yes injuries and lack of depth in the squad hampered their efforts but they shouldnt have slumped to 1 win in 7 after being in the position they were in.

[Roadpog]

To be fair Arsenal shouldn't even be a english side anymore. English football is good just take barnsly for instance. Beating chelsea and Liverpool now thats a remarkable achievement. To be honest i dont want much football anymore due to the lack of 'englishness' about it. No team has more than roughly 6 english players in the premier league and i think this is a outrage. Our national side is being torn apart by these managers that think its more important to win the premier league than it is a world cup. That is why i prefer F1. Football nowadays aint worth watching unless its World class which England are not.

Arsenal lost and Liverpool won. Liverpool deserved to win for Exploiting Arsenals faults. Some people just can't accept that. A bad penalty decision swayed it there way maybe. But Ref obviously is blind

[NeoKubrick]

To be fair Arsenal shouldn't even be a english side anymore. English football is good just take barnsly for instance. Beating chelsea and Liverpool now thats a remarkable achievement. To be honest i dont want much football anymore due to the lack of 'englishness' about it. No team has more than roughly 6 english players in the premier league and i think this is a outrage. Our national side is being torn apart by these managers that think its more important to win the premier league than it is a world cup. That is why i prefer F1. Football nowadays aint worth watching unless its World class which England are not.

Arsenal lost and Liverpool won. Liverpool deserved to win for Exploiting Arsenals faults.

From one quantum bout of stupid to another...

If you think that Wenger and other coaches who buy foreign players are the cause of a lack of education in the English football game at a grass roots level, then what I said about Pie, applies to you, too.


Formula 1? Ahaha

[Roadpog]

Its not that, i have no problems with the Foreign players it jsut they push out most English players cause they cant keep up with the fluidity of the game.

[Infidel]

i dont like english football so dont watch much anymore either but its because the teams play english football, i dont like it and think its more down to luck than actual skill like that shown in Italy for example.

the arguement about lack of english players is a long and complex one, Arsenal and arsene wenger for instance get young foreign players because they fit the style of football, not many english players do. managers dont care about prepping english players for the national side if it means they're not going to win the league, because their careers are at stake and they have a job to do, building the english side is not part of their job description. they would use the english players if they were good enough. the fact is that there simply isnt enough english talent to go round, i mean Crouch who is one of englands main strikers is struggling for a game at liverpool because hes not good enough, that says alot about the english national side really.

Edit sorry - Liverpool do not deserve to win. for exploiting Arsenals mistakes they deserve 2 goals, but the bad penalty decisions gave them the win that they did not deserve. and really it should have been 4-2 to Arsenal.

[Spindryer]

I think this is the fastest growing thread of all time, OB1theGeordie what have you started lol.

Kubrick, enlighten us what is the cause of the England teams demise if foreign managers aren't to be entirely blamed.

[Infidel]

good to be a part of Matchbox history isnt it Spin ;)

i think that the lack of english talent comes from grassroots level. i used to be in a team with some fantasticly talented players, i have no doubt they could have gone on to play at a high level, but the standard of coaching wasnt there to develop their game enough. its also their attitude, they reached 12-13 but instead of really trying to play football they turned into wankers and went round doing bad stuff, typical yobs when they really couldve been something.

[Spindryer]

Then couldn't you argue its down to the bigger clubs not sending out scouts to watch grass roots football at youth level to spot the talent and to develop it. I've played football since i was old enough and i have only played in 1 match which has had a scouting watching.

The argument could be how come Managers can go abroad and spot young talent but yet out of all the thousands and thousands of games going on the UK they cant seem to either spot our talent or just don't look for it.

[Infidel]

im talking about proper grassroots football like ages 8-16. managers arent picking up talented 10 year olds, they are picking up already developed 17-18 year olds on the cheap from abroad where they are in a bigger supply. club youth systems produce a handful of good enough players because most of the talented youth in england lose their way and never reach their full potential. young foreign players are often more determined to improve their game and prepared to practise and practise to do so than english players. yes there could be more done to try and find it in the first place but thats not the foreign managers fault.

anyway im off now, gotta be up at 6.30 :( cya later

[NeoKubrick]

Kubrick, enlighten us what is the cause of the England teams demise if foreign managers aren't to be entirely blamed.

Basic lack of education in the English game, Spin. A student can only learn what his/her teacher knows and understands. So, if a teacher doesn't understand a lot, a student isn't going to learn a lot. Now, the people in the game in England aren't going to blame themselves for their faults and inepititude - that just doesn't happen. So, they peddle this tripe about foreign coaches ruining the English game as a convenient way to deflect the blame away from them. But, and this will lead to another point about players, how many English coaches and managers are plying their trade aboard? Not many, and you know why, because they know sweet-****-all.

Also, there's an underlying mentality that England who created the game, by right should be good at the game. Hence, we hear all the hype about English players. Not many English players can hack or have hacked it aboard (Hargreaves? Beckham, to a certain extent, although I think he ruined an exciting Real Madrid side with his insisting on playing in midfield).


The problem is at grass-roots level and has to be solved at that level, and obviously, Wenger & Co. aren't at grass-roots level. So, to attribute blame to them, is to follow the opinion of those whom you really should be attributing the blame to.

[DinnyHoon]

OH CAMPIONE
THE ONE AND ONLY
WE'RE LIVERPOOL
THEY SAY OUR DAYS ARE NUMBERED
WE'RE 'NOT FAMOUS ANYMORE'
BUT SCOUSERS RULE THE COUNTRY
LIKE WE'VE ALWAYS DONE BEFORE

What a tight game. For those of you who are saying that Arenal deserved to go through, have a look at all of their chances in the first 30 minutes. They should have netted at elast 3. Liverpool were asleep, and the gunners failed to capitalise.

As for the penalty, I had the same angle as the ref, and TBH I was surprised it was given. However, I came straight in and watched the whole match again, and that was definitely a penalty. Toure (?) knocked Babel off balance, and he fell. Perhaps a bit theatrically, but he was definitely going down after getting humped by 2 players on the edge of the box. It was pretty much an exact copy of Hleb's claim at the Emirates, and that was a clear penalty as well. Arsenal should have won the first leg 2-1, 3-1 if you count Bendtner's outstanding defensive display for the wrong team.

From now on, I'll be right behind the Arsenal to go full force at United and grab the title that is deservedly theirs.

PS: Kudos to the thousands of gooners who stayed behind to applaud the players and fans, and of course to the 99.999% of all fans for observing the minute's silence.

[Gaskin]

What do people not understand!? Arsenal took their chances, it was 2-2 and the game was pretty much ours. Liverpool won PURELY because of a wrong penalty decision, how hard is that to understand.

[DinnyHoon]

What do people not understand!? Arsenal took their chances, it was 2-2 and the game was pretty much ours. Liverpool won PURELY because of a wrong penalty decision, how hard is that to understand.

But we scored again 2 minutes later. Even if you don't think that was a penalty (and there's always someone), we scored another.

A few words from the neutrals: None of the ITV pundits or commentators disputed the penalty decision, and I don't think Wenger has either.

[Gaskin]

You scored another BECAUSE of the penalty. Think logically, jesus christ. You really think if it was still 2-2 we would have 10 men up front? Think people THINK.

Oh and it WASN'T a penalty, they showed the replay like 18 times, I watched it over and over.

THINK

THINK

USE YOUR BRAIN.

;)

[Roadpog]

Yea the ref couldn't watch the replay that many times he had to make a on the spot decision. People aint going to agree but sometimes thats just football. Another bad decision to have ago at the referee's for.

[Gaskin]

I know, I just want people to realise that Liverpool won purely because of a bad penalty decision. They did not 'take their chances better' than Arsenal, it was 2-2, game was swinging Arsenal's way, and then Liverpool got lucky with a poor decision.

Life goes on.

Bristol City for the premiership.

[Roadpog]

haha i like the ending. Forest for Auto Promotion :D

[Infidel]

But we scored again 2 minutes later. Even if you don't think that was a penalty (and there's always someone), we scored another.

A few words from the neutrals: None of the ITV pundits or commentators disputed the penalty decision, and I don't think Wenger has either.

funny how when Liverpool scored their last the ITV commentator says something along the lines of at least that takes some controversy away from the penalty decision, invalidating your second point, and of course it doesnt as Arsenal dont get in to a winning position and then submit 10 players to a final attack now do they?

[BlueHoopedMoose]

I know, I just want people to realise that Liverpool won purely because of a bad penalty decision. They did not 'take their chances better' than Arsenal, it was 2-2, game was swinging Arsenal's way, and then Liverpool got lucky with a poor decision.

Life goes on.

Bristol City for the premiership.

If you watch the penalty at normal speed it's hard to see how the ref couldn't give it - Babel was in mid-air when he got nudged from behind and that caused him to go over (you're taking a risk whenever you make contact in the penalty area). In slo-mo it's not as clear cut.

It's the same with Arsenal fans every time they lose - "Oh we played the best football so wah wah wah wah" Pretty football doesn't work all the time, as shown by Liverpool giving it the welly.

Oh yeah, and any team that starts with Senderos at the back deserves to lose :)

Bristol City for the premiership.

Bristol City for the points deduction and massive fine... ;)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/b/bristol_city/7336633.stm

[Xg Corkin]

Arsenal were completed robbed. In the first leg it was and blatant penalty and in the second leg it wasn't a penalty. Even though I hate Chelsea I hope they beat Liverpool in the Semi-Final because they don't deserve to win **** all.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Even though I hate Chelsea I hope they beat Liverpool in the Semi-Final because they don't deserve to win **** all.

Yawn.

Why don't they deserver to win? They beat Fenerbache, they've got to the semi finals. Arguably they deserve it more than Arsenal, non?

[OB1theGeordie]

You can talk all day about the style of football people play.

Those who win will tell you they ain't arsed whether it's long ball or not.

At the end of the day though, the difference between Liverpool and Arsenal over the two legs was two shocking penalty decisions.

Arsenal have been unlucky this season, people will comment that they've thrown the league away, but with their squad who'd expect otherwise? It's incredibly thin. They've spent alot less than Chelsea, Man U and Liverpool over the course of the last four seasons.

Anyhoo? Champions league you say eh? Puzzle time... When was the last time an English team won the Champions League when they actually qualified for the competition as Premier League Champs?

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Puzzle time... When was the last time an English team won the Champions League when they actually qualified for the competition as Premier League Champs?


Never...?

[DinnyHoon]

If people still want to complain about that penalty decision, what about the blatant handball right before Arsenal scored goal number 1? If you want, I can cry about that all the live long day, but I understand that the referees aren't infallible robots with action replays plugged into their retinas.

OB1: That was Liverpool, winning the 1983 Division 1 title under Paisley's last year at the club, and going on to win the 1984 European Cup at Rome, beating Roma on penalties thanks to Grobbelaar having many many knees.

[Xg Corkin]

I meant Liverpool don't deserve to win **** all because the only reason they are in the Semi-Final is because of two wrong decisions by the referees.

[DinnyHoon]

I meant Liverpool don't deserve to win **** all because the only reason they are in the Semi-Final is because of two wrong decisions by the referees.

:mad: BAAAAAWWWWWWW

Christ almighty, get a grip. I've heard people dispute that penalty, and some Gaskin lookalikes say that it's what cost them the entire round, but Jesus, no-one's holding a grudge against Liverpool for it. "OMIGOD THEY KNOCKED US OUT AND I DISAGREE WITH THE REF THEY SHOULD BURN IN HELL"

[BlueHoopedMoose]

If OB1: That was Liverpool, winning the 1983 Division 1 title under Paisley's last year at the club, and going on to win the 1984 European Cup at Rome, beating Roma on penalties thanks to Grobbelaar having many many knees.

Wrong - read the question:

Puzzle time... When was the last time an English team won the Champions League when they actually qualified for the competition as Premier League Champs?

Never trust a sneaky Geordie ;)

I can haz cookie?

[Xg Corkin]

WTF are you on about. All I said is that they don't deserve to win the Champions League because the only reason they are still in it is because of referees decision which are ALWAYS given for Liverpool in Europe.

Edit: Liverpool haven't earned it, they have been given it to them on a plate by the referees over the two legs.

[DinnyHoon]

Wrong - read the question:



Never trust a sneaky Geordie ;)

I can haz cookie?

Oh, if you're on about the prem, then never :p

[DinnyHoon]

WTF are you on about. All I said is that they don't deserve to win the Champions League because the only reason they are still in it is because of referees decision which are ALWAYS given for Liverpool in Europe.

Edit: Liverpool havn't earned it, they have been given it to them on a plate by the referees over the two legs.

That's what I'm on about. Football is a man's game, so it's pathetic when people whinge and spit their dummy out over a few decisions. That's what happens in football. As far as I know, UEFA aren't speaking to either referee about either penalty. If they seriously thought they'd made huge match-killing errors, they would have demoted them by now. See: Rob Styles in October 07.

[Xg Corkin]

A few decisions? The last four games Liverpool have played they have got big decisions given for them, the sending off in the Inter Milan matches and the penalty decisions in the Arsenal matches which IMO where match-killing errors.

So because of this I will be a Chelsea supporter for the night when they play Liverpool because they have had massive decisions given for them which have kept them in the Champions League and therefore don't deserve to win it.

[nimac]

Probably a few people wondering when I was going to wade into this one!
To be honest it's blatantly obvious that Lady Luck was shining on the Pool over the last 2 legs but if you take into consideration the number of draws we have had this season perhaps we were due a little bit of luck.
I feel sorry for Arsenal because I think they had the potential to lift the league and old big ears this season but if you don't capitalise on the opportunities that are presented in front of you then you pay the price. They tore us about for about 20 minutes but once Sami got the equaliser the game changed.
You could go on about it being a dive forever but the simple fact is this...Toure made contact with the player in a dangerous area and paid the price, if the decision in the first leg was wrong then surely this one was right? The referee only sees what is in front of him and for those that have been to live matches how many times do you ask yourself if a penalty incident was the right decision, it's difficult to call!
There is no taking away from Torres' finish...............what a goal and then for Gerrard to slot that penalty away...lovely. I'm happy we won but also relieved :)

[NeoKubrick]

Pretty football doesn't work all the time, as shown by Liverpool giving it the welly.

Yeah, but it took Addy to miss the sitter of the season, Bendter to stop a goal, a penalty not given which should have been, and a penalty which shouldn't have been given for Liverpool to have won it with that boring lump it style. So, how in your mind can you say pretty football doesn't work? You can't really, even with the fact that Arsenal lost. It took a lot of luck for Liverpool to win - hey, you may say you make your own luck, yeah, by diving (Babel and Torres (who got Materazzi sent off with his blatant diving)).

As for the penalty decision, a true test of whether it was a penalty is to think would the Liverpool fans have complained if it wasn't given? I doubt they would have complained: they would have reasoned that there was little to none contact between Toure (who was actively trying not to touch Babel) and Babel and Babel went down faster than he does on Gerrard's dick in the dressing room.

[Gaskin]

1. DinnyHoon - Flamini did not hand ball it, watch it again.

2. For the last ****ing time, all you that are saying "Oh Arsenal may have pretty football but didn't take their chances but Liverpool did". Liverpool getting some lame excuse penalty to win the game is taking their chances? Arsenal had it in the bag, 2-2, away goals, if a free kick was given (which it should have been) or in free kick to Arsenal for the fact Babel blatently grabbed onto Toure and brought him into the box with him, then the game would have been completely different, and 'should' have swayed Arsenal's way.

3. Moose - that was in 2006, when we were in league one, they wouldn't be allowed to take points off us, especially considering Showunmi's hardly played this season. Don't be bitter that you won't be the only **** team in the premiership.. :p

[BlueHoopedMoose]

1. DinnyHoon - Flamini did not hand ball it, watch it again.

2. For the last ****ing time, all you that are saying "Oh Arsenal may have pretty football but didn't take their chances but Liverpool did". Liverpool getting some lame excuse penalty to win the game is taking their chances? Arsenal had it in the bag, 2-2, away goals, if a free kick was given (which it should have been) or in free kick to Arsenal for the fact Babel blatently grabbed onto Toure and brought him into the box with him, then the game would have been completely different, and 'should' have swayed Arsenal's way.

3. Moose - that was in 2006, when we were in league one, they wouldn't be allowed to take points off us, especially considering Showunmi's hardly played this season. Don't be bitter that you won't be the only **** team in the premiership.. :p

2. You're right, it could've been different - Liverpool could've scored a goal after that anyway. Reina would've pushed up for a corner and scored with a diving bullet header. 3-2 Liverpool... I think what galls people is that Arsenal are using the logic you've highlighted and yet in previous years how many times has Mr Wenger chosen not to see an incident? If Arsenal had taken their clear-cut chances (seriously, how the feck did Ade miss that chance?) then this would all be irrelevant. Liverpool took their chances (including the penalty - dodgy or not) and Arsenal didn't.

3. Oh they would be allowed to take points off - you forget, the FA are brilliant at changing the rules to suit themselves. Anyways, you've got a long way to go yet; your next two games are "massive", especially Stoke. Combine that with a poor goal difference and the fat lady certainly hasn't sung - she's barely warmed up!

[Dark]

No way was that miss of the season from Adebayor, there have been a few blazed over from about 6 yards out, but still an easy chance.
I'm pretty sure Liverpool created some good chances which they missed in the 1st leg like the Riise chance.

Its also quite funny to hear an Arsenal fan moaning about diving

[Bonzo]

2. You're right, it could've been different - Liverpool could've scored a goal after that anyway. Reina would've pushed up for a corner and scored with a diving bullet header. 3-2 Liverpool... I think what galls people is that Arsenal are using the logic you've highlighted and yet in previous years how many times has Mr Wenger chosen not to see an incident? If Arsenal had taken their clear-cut chances (seriously, how the feck did Ade miss that chance?) then this would all be irrelevant. Liverpool took their chances (including the penalty - dodgy or not) and Arsenal didn't.
Poor playing surface.

Liverpool had a penalty, Arsenal didn't.

:p

[NeoKubrick]

No way was that miss of the season from Adebayor, there have been a few blazed over from about 6 yards out, but still an easy chance.
I'm pretty sure Liverpool created some good chances which they missed in the 1st leg like the Riise chance.

Its also quite funny to hear an Arsenal fan moaning about diving
Name another chance that was as costly as that miss from Addy, pseudo-intellectual? ;)

[Gaskin]

Liverpool didn't take their chances more than Arsenal. We scored the same amount of goals, It was only because of a penalty that Liverpool got A goal, and then got pne shitty one when 10 men were up front. Think Think Think.

[Dark]

No you said it was "the sitter of the season" not that it was the most costly miss of the season, which I probably would of agreed with.

[Roadpog]

Does it really matter who won. The fact is the Ref gave a on the spot decision Arsenal played that part of the game dangerously. Obviously it was a dive but some people don't agree, and for Arsenal fans crying about a Dive is amazing.

10 men behind a ball obviously worked so you cant deny the fact.

[NeoKubrick]

No you said it was "the sitter of the season" not that it was the most costly miss of the season, which I probably would of agreed with.

Well, what's the difference? Of course, you're going to remember those chances missed that are the most costly and most significant.

[Dark]

I'd say sitter of the season is the worst miss in general no matter what the situation. So you could be winning 4-0 and miss from a yard with an open goal.
But ye this wouldn't be remembered as much as one that proved very costly even if its not that bad like missing a 1 v 1.

It's a bit like goal of the season in that the winner is normally an amazing shot or team move and not just a good finish to win the game in the last seconds of a match.

[OB1theGeordie]

Well done to moose who spotted the little play on words with regard to that teaser i threw in.

Some of you should count yourself lucky that you can even discuss your teams champions league exploits.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Liverpool didn't take their chances more than Arsenal. We scored the same amount of goals, It was only because of a penalty that Liverpool got A goal, and then got pne shitty one when 10 men were up front. Think Think Think.

There is just so much wrong with that sentence Gaskin and you know it. You didn't score the same amount of goals - the circumstances of how it happened are irrelevant. Liverpool had more possession, more corners, more shots on target. The only thing Arsenal had more of was yellow cards :D

If a penalty = a shot on target, which it must, then Liverpool hit the target 8 times, scored 4 - 50% success. Arsenal had 5 shots on target, scored 2 - 40% success. So yes, Liverpool DID take their chances.

I believe what you need to be arguing is not if they took them or not, but if they deserved those chances. And to answer that I refer you to my previous comment re: Senderos ;)

[Gaskin]

If you looked at the amount of stats BEFORE the penalty (luckily enough they came up which I took acknowledgment of.) It was nothing like that, pretty much the same amount of shots on targets (can't be precise). Stop talking like Liverpool won deservingly, they didn't, and everyone should realise. I don't care that they're through, as it's not going to hurt me personally, it's going to make it easier for Cheslea and United but hell who cares.. the fact of the matter is, Liverpool won purely because of the penalty. How hard is that to get your mind over?

Liverpool hit the target 8 times - 1 goal from a cheap penalty, 1 goal from when a team has 10 players up front. Cancel them out, and liverpool scored 2 from 6, and Arsenal scored 2 from 5. You are quite frankly talking out of your backside Mr Moose. I'm not even being bias anymore, I'm just being plain logical.

[Roadpog]

1 Goal which 10 players up front? Is still a hot on target so you can't really cancel it out :S

Liverpool deserve the win why can you get your mind over that?
Liverpool obviously played as the better team, They thought about it and brought it back in, YES!!! a penalty decision helps them but it happens in games. I know they played terrible but they still scraped a win, and that's what counts

[Gaskin]

The 4th goal, wouldn't have happened like it did, yes Liverpool could have still got a goal late on to win, but however so could have Arsenal if there wasn't a penalty decision. The penalty changed the game and got Liverpool the win. Liverpool did not deserve a win, they didn't play as the better team, both team had their moments, and a draw was the fairest result, unfortunately for Liverpool that would have ended up in Arsenal's victory due to away goals. But no, Liverpool got a cheap penalty, which handed them the win.

[Infidel]

1 Goal which 10 players up front? Is still a hot on target so you can't really cancel it out :S

Liverpool deserve the win why can you get your mind over that?
Liverpool obviously played as the better team, They thought about it and brought it back in, YES!!! a penalty decision helps them but it happens in games. I know they played terrible but they still scraped a win, and that's what counts

1. erm yea... you can cancel the last goal out, it would never of happened like that if there wasnt a penalty.

2. by saying that Liverpool deserved the win, you're actually saying that they deserved to get a cheap penalty and that Arsenal didnt deserve the penalty in the first game. Am i correct?

3. i think the penalty decisionS helped them more than just a little bit.

4. scraping a win by getting a bad penalty decision means they were the better team even though they "Played terrible"?

[BlueHoopedMoose]

I'm not even being bias anymore, I'm just being plain logical.
And so was I Dan - which is why I used the final game stats. Using stats before a penalty to prove that a result was or wan't right is, to me, nowhere near logical. You've selectively used some facts to back up your point - Danger Will Robinson!!

You keep banging on about having ten men up front... and who's fault is that? What were Liverpool meant to do - not score and politely say "Oh sorry old bean - we'll wait till you get back in numbers"

If there is one thing I've learnt from watching football over the last gazillion years it's this - there is no such thing as "deserve" (and please note I don't believe I've actually come out and said that Liverpool deserved to win) - you're beginning to sound like an extra in "The Color of Money".

The team that take their chances are the ones that win regardless of how those chances are presented. Arsenal didn't take theirs, Liverpool did (how easy would it have been for Gerrard to miss that pen?)

You are quite frankly talking out of your backside Mr Moose.
From the person who said that both teams scored the same amount of goals I find that extremely rich and, to be honest, quite offensive.

[Infidel]

i think his point is that the BAD PENALTY DECISION which Liverpool got for them completely changed the game, at that point Liverpool werent in a position to go through so by your very own logic Arsenal were the better team up until that point. The BAD PENALTY DECISION which Liverpool didnt deserve meant that they went through, not by their footballing ability. the last goal is completey irrelevant as it never would of happened without the BAD PENALTY DECSISION.

[Gaskin]

Liverpool didn't take their ****ing chances, they got a penalty. You're talking absolute horse **** Andi, bloody think about what you're saying. Both teams scored the same amount of legitimate goals is obviously what I meant, you of all people should work that out.

It wasn't Liverpool's fault Arsenal had 10 men up front, but what was the reason Arsenal had so many up there? Oh wait, that thing called a penalty that changed the game and gave Liverpool the win? OH RIGHT.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

the last goal is completey irrelevant as it never would of happened without the BAD PENALTY DECSISION.
Really? You know that how...? You think there is NO POSSIBILITY that Liverpool wouldn't have pushed forward, got a corner and Senderos fell asleep yet again? Or maybe even Gerrard scoring another belter from 30 yards in the dying minutes?

It's this insistance that it never would've happened but for the penalty that drives me mad. You cannot possibly say that. I could say that Reading would've been in Europe by now instead of Arsenal if Archie hadn't missed *that* penalty or McAteer hadn't been such a cheating ****.


Liverpool didn't take their ****ing chances, they got a penalty.
...which they promptly scored. They were presented with a chance. They took it.

Both teams scored the same amount of legitimate goals is obviously what I meant, you of all people should work that out.
Except for the fourth goal, right? But oh noes that could never have happened... (see above)

Once again - I don't believe I've said that Liverpool deserved the win - just they most probably deserved it more than Arsenal. Who, lets face it, had chances to wrap the game up before the penalty.

[Infidel]

you are completely missing the point, i was referring to the circumstance of the last goal (you know, 10 men up front and all). the bad penalty decision completely changed the game in Liverpools favour when they clearly, by your own logic as Arsenal were in the position to go through (and hence they deserve it), didnt "deserve" to get it. yes there is the possibility that they would have got another goal in the last few minutes, that cannot ever be known if they would or not, but the chances are in Arsenals favour as it would have to be considered unlikely at the very least with Arsenal putting 11men behind the ball as Liverpool did to stop arsenal in the dying minutes.

Liverpool were presented with a chance that they DID NOT CREATE, it was handed to them by a referee. i would expect any team to take the chance of a penalty, its hardly an achievement.

just because Arsenal didnt take SOME of the chances THEY CREATED, yet they were still in a winning position up until the bad penalty decision does not mean that they deserve it less.

[Dannyooo]

Liverpool didn't take their ****ing chances,they got a penalty. You're talking absolute **** Andi, Bloody think about what you're saying. Both teams scored the same amount of legitamte goals is this obiously what meant, you of all people should work that out.

It wasn't Liverpool's fault Arsenal had 10 men up front, but what was the reason Arsenal had so many up there? Oh wait, that thing called a penalty that changed the game and gave Liverpool the win? Oh right.

^^ for spin

[Spindryer]

^^^ I don't know copying what Gaskin says has to do with meeting me on halo in 5 minutes?

lolz.

[Dannyooo]

Stay on topic please spindryer

[Spindryer]

To-shay, to-shay my friend. Well staying on topic i think its time we got over the day light robbery of the Arsenal - Liverpool game as shite happens in football and you have to take the rough with the smooth.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Liverpool were presented with a chance that they DID NOT CREATE, it was handed to them by a referee. i would expect any team to take the chance of a penalty, its hardly an achievement.

Of course they created it - someone had to get in the box in the first place. Contact had to be made, a tackle was put in.

And not an acheivement?! Are you actually being serious here?!?!? Try telling that to Mssrs Pearce, Waddle, Southgate, Batty, Beckham and Ince. Taking a penalty in a high pressure situation (as this was) is not an easy task.

[Gaskin]

Andi stop, think. There.

You are saying if there wasn't a penalty Liverpool might have gone on to get a goal regardless, correct. However Arsenal had the momentum, just got a goal and could have also gone on to get a winner. The penalty changed the game, made the game, Liverpool did not earn there victory fairly, it was PURELY because of the penalty. May I remind you, this was not a penalty. How Liverpool took their chances more because they got a dodgy penalty I don't ****ing know. Stupidest comment I have ever heard from some people. Liverpool took their chances and got the win... jesus christ. Liverpool did take the chance, take the chance of getting a yellow card by falling over like a girl inside the box after being tapped on the arm outside and proceeding to hold on to toure.

ON LAN YE LIVERPOOL, ON LAN.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

However Arsenal had the momentum, just got a goal and could have also gone on to get a winner.

This is true... but if that's the case, isn't this slightly contradictory?

Liverpool did not earn there victory fairly, it was PURELY because of the penalty.

May I remind you, this was not a penalty.
It was a penalty. Semantics I know but the ref GAVE A PENALTY. It's ****ing irrelevant if you or anyone else disagrees because it happened.

How Liverpool took their chances more because they got a dodgy penalty I don't ****ing know.
This makes no sense. Please, ignore the issue of if the penalty was dodgy or not - the fact is Liverpool took the chances that were presented to them.

[IcemanLeigh]

I have to say Dan, you do completely irradicate every single point you make by making ridiculous comments at the end of posts, such as:

ON LAN YE LIVERPOOL, ON LAN.

Without the penalty Arsenal MAY have gone on to get another goal. But lets flip the tables. In real time, the penalty looked like a stone wall penalty. Ignoring the fact that a referee apparently in your books should be some superhuman slow-motion seeing all knowing being, if the penalty had not been given, the Liverpool players and crowd would have felt agreived to have NOT been given said penalty. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but from footballing experience, how often has a penalty that has NOT been given, when all fans and players believe it to be so, completely changed the game from the way it was. Arsenal were on top before the penalty decision, but I am pretty sure that you are in no way given some God gifted right to dictate to the rest of us how a game would have panned out without it. Seriously now, and to coin a phrase, think.

[NeoKubrick]

Moose, can you point out, out of all those statistics you're clinging onto, one clear-cut chance Liverpool carved out of the match? They had zilch. Arsenal had two clear-cut chances to score. So, that hollow ground you're attempting to build an argument on collapses. I mean, you're banging on about shots on goal, when most of the time Arsenal would prefer to pass it into the net from five yards, then take shots left, right, and center - can the same be said of Liverpool?

Now, quit trolling this thread with your chicanery. ;)


Well, Leigh, isn't it funny that you're arguing the difficulty of the ref's plight, rather than arguing that he got the decision right? ;)

[IcemanLeigh]

I am not arguing anything. For a start, as Moose pointed out, my opinion upon whether or not the decision was right is irrelevant, the problem I have with this thread is the amount of hindsight lovers telling me what would have happened had the penalty not been given. I need to keep close with these people and get them to give me some lottery numbers.

Oh and I'm a noob.

[Gaskin]

If you read what I said, I said Liverpool could have gone on to score, so could Arsenal. What annoys me is the ****ing idiocy of people saying Liverpool took their chances. It's such horse ****.

If this was reversed, and Arsenal had won because of a lame ass penalty, exactly the same way, I can 100% tell you that you'd all be backing Liverpool still. It's ridiculous that people's hatred for a club can blind them from the ****ing obvious.

Now, I'm off to ****ing spain.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Moose, can you point out, out of all those statistics you're clinging onto, one clear-cut chance Liverpool carved out of the match? They had zilch. Arsenal had two clear-cut chances to score.
I don't give two shits if they were clear cut or not (though I must say that the first goal could be classed that way with the amount of space Hyypia had) - a shot on target is a shot on target.

So Arsenal had two-clear cut chances - does this include the Adebayor miss? The fact they missed the sitters makes it even worse! You miss easy chances like that you don't deserve to go through.

I mean, you're banging on about shots on goal, when most of the time Arsenal would prefer to pass it into the net from five yards, then take shots left, right, and center - can the same be said of Liverpool?
Sorry, you've lost me here - what has this got to do with anything? More fool Arsenal I say because as we've seen time and time again it is this way of playing that has been the undoing of Arsenal.

What point exactly are you trying to prove here? The context I was using the stats was in response to a point re: taking chances. Passing <> chances - trust me, I watched a Tommy Burns team play for nearly 2 years.

[NeoKubrick]

You miss easy chances like that you don't deserve to go through.
And Liverpool do, for creating nothing?

Ouch...

[BlueHoopedMoose]

What annoys me is the ****ing idiocy of people saying Liverpool took their chances. It's such horse ****.
And what annoys me is your idiocy in saying they didn't take their chances. Listen to what you're saying FFS. A shot on goal is a chance. They took some of them. Adebayor had a chance on goal - he missed it, didn't take it.

If this was reversed, and Arsenal had won because of a lame ass penalty, exactly the same way, I can 100% tell you that you'd all be backing Liverpool still. It's ridiculous that people's hatred for a club can blind them from the ****ing obvious.
From my perspective that doesn't come into it - I don't hate Arsenal, nor particularly like Liverpool. I am ambivalent to them both. What does wind me up is the typical Arsenal fan mentality that because they play a beautiful game (and they indeed do) that other teams don't deserve to win. Arsenal were found lacking, once again.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

And Liverpool do, for creating nothing?

Ouch...

Creating nothing? They scored two completely legitimate goals before the penalty even occured. How is that "nothing"? Please, do explain.

[NeoKubrick]

Creating nothing? They scored two completely legitimate goals before the penalty even occured. How is that "nothing"? Please, do explain.
Er, we're talking about clear-cut chances apart from the goals scored, but you knew that. So, quit deflecting and answer:

"And Liverpool do [deserve the win] for creating nothing?"

[Renegade]

Gaskin - you sure you're a Bristol City fan?

[Terbinator]

can a moderator not delete this thread, its no longer causing heated debates they are now more like arguments. im sure it would clear the air on the forum on the whole as well.

[Renegade]

That's what all the football threads turn into - the neutrals can't win because they are 'hacks' raised on Match of the Day, and the supporters can't win because they are biased. Then you have the pseudo-supporters who protest the case when it suits them, and follow someone else when it doesn't. Next, you have the 'annoyers' that claim because a score was a score that it deserved to be that score (the same people that claim "the table doesn't lie"). Finally, you have the people that just love to sit back and watch.

[NeoKubrick]

can a moderator not delete this thread, its no longer causing heated debates they are now more like arguments. im sure it would clear the air on the forum on the whole as well.
What? This forum has been dead for the past few weeks, because there hasn't been enough good members to take the place of others who have left for greener pastures. If you want to help the forum, try posting something worthwhile, eh, instead of adding your insipid commentary?

[Gaskin]

I ****ing follow two teams? How hard is that to understand? I'm a Bristol City fan, and an Arsenal follower. Get over it, stop being a dick.

Now I'm literally leaving. And all my comments were not because I follow Arsenal at all, any neutral or a ****ing liverpool fan in that sense should see it how it is. Liverpool won because of a lucky penalty, end of.

[Terbinator]

well im a united fan so im sure people on this thread dont wanna hear it

[Renegade]

Gaskin - I disagree. In your opinion that's why Liverpool won.

Gooner ;)

[Terbinator]

Gaskin - I disagree. In your opinion that's why Liverpool won.

Gooner ;)

shouldnt that be gonner ;)

[Roadpog]

The penalty wasn't lucky. Arsenal was playing with fire in all honesty. In the area Ref not in the position to make a right call and a nudge. So it might not have been a penalty to you after you seen it in MANY different angle's but remember only one or two count and thats the ref's.
I don't think Liverpool deserve the win but they got it and thats it. They might of put 10 people up front, but it got them a goal?

[Gaskin]

100% dumb kids.

Speak to you in a week.

[Roadpog]

Your supporting Arsenal your bound to go against the Penalty and the way they play in that match. And to be fair we might be thinking your the dumb one for thinking that.
Don't start crying just cause Arsenal lost to Scousers

[Terbinator]

will we still be putting up with the ranting in a weeks time? you know after united beat arsenal, but of course arsenal will deserve to win:D

[Renegade]

Gaskin, stop with the attitude. It's a difference of opinion, stop taking it so personally.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Er, we're talking about clear-cut chances apart from the goals scored, but you knew that. So, quit deflecting and answer:

"And Liverpool do [deserve the win] for creating nothing?"
How am I meant to know that? I didn't know that the goals scored didn't count - can we discount Arsenal's two goals as well?

And as I believe that Liverpool DID create something (otherwise they would have scored nothing) I can't really answer your question.

And how about you "quit deflecting" and answer my question re: what the hell you were trying to prove by bringing Arsenal's penchant for trying to pass the ball into the net?

[NeoKubrick]

How am I meant to know that? I didn't know that the goals scored didn't count - can we discount Arsenal's two goals as well?

And as I believe that Liverpool DID create something (otherwise they would have scored nothing) I can't really answer your question.

And how about you "quit deflecting" and answer my question re: what the hell you were trying to prove by bringing Arsenal's penchant for trying to pass the ball into the net?

Er, we're talking about clear-cut chances other than the goals scored by both Liverpool and Arsenal, obviously. The two goals Liverpool and Arsenal scored cancel each other out. So, chances and not goals (note the difference) have to be the determining factor before the ridiculous decision to reward a penalty that never was.

I wasn't trying to prove anything with stating the redundant obvious that Arsenal's style is passing the ball into the net. I was disproving your ridiculous notion that somehow shots on or off target relate to who was the superior team.


And okay, if you want to be pedantic, answer this question: Liverpool deserved to win for creating less than Arsenal did?


It's funny that so-called football fans have been waiting for an opportunity to put the knife into Arsenal for playing beautiful football. I mean, there's really no argument to say that Liverpool deserved to go through and Arsenal didn't - not on any basis other than they scored more goals, which was solely based on a wrong decision - and yet, you have retards looking for to spout any old dimwitted argument to support that fact.

[nimac]

Tuesday, 22 April 2008
Liverpool v Chelsea, SF, L1, 19:45

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wednesday, 23 April 2008
Barcelona v Man Utd, SF, L1, 19:45

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday, 29 April 2008
Man Utd v Barcelona, SF, L2, 19:45

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wednesday, 30 April 2008
Chelsea v Liverpool, SF, L2, 19:45

[Dark]

who can even care anymore, Liverpool through and Arsenal out end of.

Moose give up trust me I've tried argueing with Arsenal fans on here before it gets you nowhere.

[Spindryer]

Oy, i'm a Arsenal fan and i can accept we were victims of our own missed chances in both fixtures.

[Dark]

well then I commend thee

[OB1theGeordie]

Nimac, when's the draw for the final mate? ;)

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Once again you're twisting what people say and putting words in their mouths. Please don't - it makes it kind of awkward to have a discussion.

I was disproving your ridiculous notion that somehow shots on or off target relate to who was the superior team.
I was posting stats in reply to what Gaskin was saying - I don't think once I've said one team was more superior than the other, just that Liverpool took their chances whilst Arsenal didn't and that no-one can say for fact that the penalties (or lack of) were the only reason Liverpool won. How many times have you seen a penalty wrongly given, keeper saves it and then... well, that's the point isn't it? I've seen many teams win, lose and draw from that position.

It's funny that so-called football fans have been waiting for an opportunity to put the knife into Arsenal for playing beautiful football. I mean, there's really no argument to say that Liverpool deserved to go through and Arsenal didn't - not on any basis other than they scored more goals, which was solely based on a wrong decision - and yet, you have retards looking for to spout any old dimwitted argument to support that fact.
I've not been waiting for any opportunity - all I've really said against them is that once again they have come up short - the previous other times they've been found wanting it has been attributed to their style of play. They do sometimes over-do it.

I've seen Arsenal give my team a "footballing lesson" several times, and last season their performance at our place was the best I'd ever seen there.

I have no axe to grind against Arsenal - it's the fans that drive me bonkers. Paranoid is a word you could describe the way some of them come across - same could be said of the manager at times.

Their insistance that because they play the beautiful game they somehow have a right to win things staggers me. Their style has to be applauded, and I believe Arsene is one of the best things to happen to the Premiership since it was started - it's just that pretty doesn't equal wins and it most certainly doesn't belittle the performance of the teams that do beat them. To say Liverpool created nothing is just wrong. Did someone decide to kick the ball out for fun, leading to a corner and Liverpool's first? No, a cross was put into the box creating something. Granted their attempts were not as "beautiful" as those of Arsenal but they DID have more chances in the last game.

Pretty football didn't stop Ade missing; didn't stop Bendter's goal-line clearance; didn't stop Senderos defending like a school boy. It also didn't stop the ref giving the penalty.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Oy, i'm a Arsenal fan and i can accept we were victims of our own missed chances in both fixtures.

/hug

I'm feeling the love there Spin :)

[NeoKubrick]

Once again you're twisting what people say and putting words in their mouths. Please don't - it makes it kind of awkward to have a discussion.
To say Liverpool created nothing is just wrong.
Eh? I said that Liverpool created nothing in references apart from the goals they scored.


Please quit posting irrelevant trivia in an effort to relegate this argument to pedantry. Let's go back to relevant issues.

You have to look at football objectively, not through the eyes of what the hacks think. Over two legs, how many clear-cut chances (obviously apart from the goals they scored for those too senile to distinguish between the two) did Liverpool produce? Riise's miss, and any other in the first leg? They created no clear-cut chances in the second leg. How many clear-cut chances did Arsenal produce? Fabregas' shot on goal in the first leg? Addy's and Eboue's in the second leg? So, any argument on grounds of who produced more is in Arsenal's favour.

So, let's address the argument that Liverpool took the chances they converted and Arsenal didn't. The only separation on this issue is the penalty converted and Babel's goal, which is irrelevant. Furthermore, how can one say that Fabregas didn't take his chance, or say that Arsenal weren't extremely unlucky (to understate) not to have converted that chance? The only difference was the penalty in the second leg.

Now, the penalty was ironic, because the contact in the penalty appeal in the first leg was much stronger (i.e. Kuyt actually tried to impede Hleb) and wasn't given. In fact, Toure actively tried to avoid touching Babel after cutting across, but Babel dived (and don't think I won't bring this up to all those who haven't condemned Babel for diving when they eventually moan about player x or y diving). As Rafa said: he got a "fantastic reaction" from his team - yeah, Babel dived. Yet, some idiot (specifically Moose) will say "no-one can say for fact that the penalties (or lack of) were the only reason Liverpool won".

Liverpool didn't deserve to go through. There is no ground or no support for an argument. They created one clear-cut chance (Riise's) to Arsenal's three. Arsenal missed one of those chances to Bendter clearing off the opponent's goal-line unwittingly. Arsenal should have had a penalty in the first leg; Liverpool shouldn't have had a penalty in the second.

That's an objective view without the tired cliches and erroneous commentary of "Arsenal didn't take their chances" and "Liverpool scored more goals". Arsenal deserved to go through, and that's not based on how they play football, that's based on who created more and Liverpool scoring a goal from penalty that never should have been awarded. You can't refute with anything other than mindless commentary.



Now, my personal view. when I watch football, I want to see the best football team win: the most hard-working and skillful team. Liverpool are probably the most hard-working team in Europe, but they have no guile whatsoever. They put nine men behind the ball most of the time in the first leg, and at Anfield, they hoofed it up to Crouch every single time. Now, you'll say, it was great tactics by Rafa. Yeah, what great tactics of football rely on so much luck: Bendter's mad clearance, ref's mad decision to not award a penalty, Flamini going off injured, Addy fluffing it in front of goal, Eboue's glory-hunting, and another mad decision by a referee (oh, and don't retort back with the moronic 'you make your own luck' - please, apply that to any of incidents I mentioned: it'll just make it easier to show you up).

[Spindryer]

Right back at ya ;)

I think Arsenal played out of theier skins at times against Liverpool and there's not many teams that can go to Anfield and give such an attractive game to watch, i agree after seeing the penalty that Liverpool were Lucky it was awarded but when your drawing 2-2 away from home you cant blame it all on 1 "imo" bad decision from the ref. When the blame game starts you have to take both games into account and every single mistake made from the first minute to the last.

Arsenal didn't take their chances at home and going into the away fixture they shouldn't of let Liverpool back into the game, let alone conceded 2 goals. I do believe out of the 2 fixtures it would of maybe more just to see Arsenal go through but the fact is Liverpool did enough in both fixtures to go through and that's football.

On a positive note who else is looking forward to seeing an all English club final (pending Man U do the business) :)

[Roadpog]

If you want to see skill watch italian football if you want to see the team you support win, watch the league there in.
You have to admit English football will never have skill. Only certain player will bring it in such as most of Arsenal :p Ronaldo and so on.
I agree with most of what you say Kubrick but putting 9 people behind the ball worked and it payed off. Sometime football isn't all about skill it's about the win.
No Liverpool supporter or 'Neutral' is gonna go against that Penalty. You see that penalty everytime at a diff angle to the ref and obviously to him it was a Penalty, Nothing is gonna change his view. To be fair they should implement what they do in rugby but they don't and obviously this time Arsenal got the worst of it.
Now all you can do is focus on the premiership and leave at that, This discussion is over all people are doing is repeating themselves.

Arsenal lost fair and square and to say babel dived, to be fair i couldn't care cause what player doesn't in the box?

[NeoKubrick]

If you want to see skill watch italian football if you want to see the team you support win, watch the league there in.
You have to admit English football will never have skill. Only certain player will bring it in such as most of Arsenal :p Ronaldo and so on.
I agree with most of what you say Kubrick but putting 9 people behind the ball worked and it payed off. Sometime football isn't all about skill it's about the win.
No Liverpool supporter or 'Neutral' is gonna go against that Penalty. You see that penalty everytime at a diff angle to the ref and obviously to him it was a Penalty, Nothing is gonna change his view. To be fair they should implement what they do in rugby but they don't and obviously this time Arsenal got the worst of it.
Now all you can do is focus on the premiership and leave at that, This discussion is over all people are doing is repeating themselves.

Arsenal lost fair and square and to say babel dived, to be fair i couldn't care cause what player doesn't in the box?
Another heard from. Roadpog, let me just say that your trying to act as mediator and voice of reason is about as credible as Moose's commentary on the Blu-ray versus HD-DVD debate. So, quit the act, son, and most importantly, quit interjecting. And don't condescend to me about discussions being over, after your babbling on with Bushmouseone about some such **** relating to a girl hosting on Gears of War, and other some **** relating to shitty clans.


but putting 9 people behind the ball worked and it payed off. Sometime football isn't all about skill it's about the win.
Read an excerpt of the post you actually responded to:

"Now, you'll say, it was great tactics by Rafa. Yeah, what great tactics of football rely on so much luck: Bendter's mad clearance, ref's mad decision to not award a penalty, Flamini going off injured, Addy fluffing it in front of goal, Eboue's glory-hunting, and another mad decision by a referee (oh, and don't retort back with the moronic 'you make your own luck' - please, apply that to any of incidents I mentioned: it'll just make it easier to show you up)."

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Eh? I said that Liverpool created nothing in references apart from the goals they scored.

No, no you didn't...
And Liverpool do, for creating nothing?

Ouch...
I asked you to clarify what you were getting at and now all of a sudden I'm posting "irrelevant trivia in an effort to relegate this argument to pedantry"?? You love to have a pop at people for not answering your questions, yet when someone queries you it's irrelevant?

And please, do not resort to personal insults - it shows you up Seriously, why do it? I've not had a pop at you and in the space of two posts you've called me senile, an idiot and worthless. Why? What moral high ground does it get you? Or is this your take of trolling?

"Yet, some idiot (specifically Moose) will say "no-one can say for fact that the penalties (or lack of) were the only reason Liverpool won"."
Why is it so idiotic to say that? Anything could've happened in the remaining 8 or so minutes of the last game and with Liverpool needing to score to go through I'm sure something would have happened.

[DinnyHoon]

I can't believe you're still moaning about the penalty Kubrick. You're acting as if you know for sure that had we not been given that penalty, you would have ploughed through to the semis. Anything could have happened. Hyypia could have scored another header, Reina could have pulled something out of nothing in an injury time corner. Babel could have burst past a tired Fabregas to slot it past Almunia, regardless of what you say about the circumstances of that goal. Hell, why not apply this retroactively? Adebayor could have netted that miss. Flamini could have avoided the challenge that injured him. Torres could have been shot. But this is football, and you have to live with what happened. Not cry about what 'should' have happened for 3 days.

[Terbinator]

well said

[Renegade]

I can't believe you're still moaning about the penalty Kubrick. You're acting as if you know for sure that had we not been given that penalty, you would have ploughed through to the semis. Anything could have happened. Hyypia could have scored another header, Reina could have pulled something out of nothing in an injury time corner. Babel could have burst past a tired Fabregas to slot it past Almunia, regardless of what you say about the circumstances of that goal. Hell, why not apply this retroactively? Adebayor could have netted that miss. Flamini could have avoided the challenge that injured him. Torres could have been shot. But this is football, and you have to live with what happened. Not cry about what 'should' have happened for 3 days.

Superb post. *wishes for a rep system*

[NeoKubrick]

No, no you didn't...

Go back and read, then, where I count goals scored as 'chances'...


now all of a sudden I'm posting "irrelevant trivia in an effort to relegate this argument to pedantry"??

And please, do not resort to personal insults - it shows you up Seriously, why do it? I've not had a pop at you and in the space of two posts you've called me senile, an idiot and worthless. Why? What moral high ground does it get you? Or is this your take of trolling?
...
"Yet, some idiot (specifically Moose) will say "no-one can say for fact that the penalties (or lack of) were the only reason Liverpool won"."
Why is it so idiotic to say that? Anything could've happened in the remaining 8 or so minutes of the last game and with Liverpool needing to score to go through I'm sure something would have happened.
So, what you're basically saying is that because you're sure something would have happened or anything could have happened, "no-one can say for fact that the penalties (or lack of) were the only reason Liverpool won"? So, please, found some basis for Liverpool's win upon one of these happenings - maybe a pick from Dinny's imaginative lil' noggin'.

Dinnyhoon posits an equally idiotic argument of the same type. Did anything of what you stated, Dinny, happen? No. So, wouldn't it take a retarded monkey and on advice from his consultation with a half-wit chimp to apply non-existent situations to an existent one? Think about that one, and then answer this question, are you the retarded monkey or the half-wit chimp?


Quit cheerleading, Dan - especially such moronic replies...

[Roadpog]

Are you still crying? jesus christ.

[DinnyHoon]

I was pointing out, Neo, that you shouldn't babble and whinge about what 'should' have happened. Football is football. Once the ref makes a decision, you have maybe 2 hours max to moan about it. It's Friday. As for the random resorting to petty name-calling and the belief that everyone on the globe except you is wrong, I can only bow gracefully out of any discussion with you, because it clearly ends in you spitting your dummy out when someone has the sheer nerve to disagree with you.

[NeoKubrick]

Are you still crying? jesus christ.
By what reasoning have you come to that conclusion?

[Roadpog]

Cause what happend, happend and your acting as if you need to change it. It happend 3 days ago leave it out.
Arsenal lost fair and square. Liverpool played the game and won
A penalty was awarded but no-one can change it. Seems your the only arsenal fan that is really having problems with it.

[NeoKubrick]

I was pointing out, Neo, that you shouldn't babble and whinge about what 'should' have happened. Football is football. Once the ref makes a decision, you have maybe 2 hours max to moan about it. It's Friday. As for the random resorting to petty name-calling and the belief that everyone on the globe except you is wrong, I can only bow gracefully out of any discussion with you, because it clearly ends in you spitting your dummy out when someone has the sheer nerve to disagree with you.

So, why are you still here posting in response to me? I mean, you can't wade in the low dirty road and sit atop the high road acting as if butter wouldn't melt in your mouth, when you are actively continuing this discussion and actively whinging about my post equally as you would claim it of me. The fact is I've said all that has needed to be said about the match, but the fish keep trying to catch the bait even well after it's been called bait. The only parts of the match which ought to have happened and which I stated such were the penalty decisions.

You lost the opportunity to bow out of this discussion gracefully, when you posited that we should apply non-existent scenarios to an analysis of a game of football in the past.

[DinnyHoon]

Wow. Just..... wow. I honestly didn't know anyone could be that.... wow.















So, the semis are coming up! Anyone have any predictions for the first legs?

[Roadpog]

Yea i predict Liverpool win and they'll be another argument that They didn't deserve the win :p

[Pirate Balloon]

This wouldn't happen with croquet

[Terbinator]

or competitive sneezing

[Roadpog]

Haha, you'd be suprised in Croquet i often see old people beating each other up as i walk in the park, All because they lost

[Zaxgod]

but the fish keep trying to catch the bait even well after it's been called bait

lmao what kind of metaphor/figure of speech is that?!

[NeoKubrick]

lmao what kind of metaphor/figure of speech is that?!
I don't know, son, you tell me...:rolleyes:

[IcemanLeigh]

Woah woah woah. Hang on one minute..

Now I have stayed out of this thread for the most part but this simply cannot be ignored.

Dinnyhoon posits an equally idiotic argument of the same type. Did anything of what you stated, Dinny, happen? No. So, wouldn't it take a retarded monkey and on advice from his consultation with a half-wit chimp to apply non-existent situations to an existent one? Think about that one, and then answer this question, are you the retarded monkey or the half-wit chimp?

Think about that quote Neo, then please answer this question, are you not the one still suggesting that the penalty should not have been a penalty, and Arsenal would have won if it had not been so? Surely now, the penalty not being given is a non-existant situation which you are trying to apply to an existant one? Let alone what may or may not have finished afterwards.

I will admit that I havn't read this thread in its entirety, mainly due to getting bored of the innane ramblings of a madman, but it would seem the half witted chimp is calling the retarded monkey, black..

[Terbinator]

same old arsenal always cheating. COME ON UNITED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Zaxgod]

Weeeeeyyyy terb knows where its at :D

[NeoKubrick]

Woah woah woah. Hang on one minute..
Time for the brolly, again?

Think about that quote Neo, then please answer this question, are you not the one still suggesting that the penalty should not have been a penalty, and Arsenal would have won if it had not been so? Surely now, the penalty not being given is a non-existant situation which you are trying to apply to an existant one? Let alone what may or may not have finished afterwards.

Listen, I know you fancy yourself some sort of logician, but I have to laugh at your attempts to apply even the simplest of reasoning to such complex sentences...

Was the penalty given, Leigh? Yes. So, that exists, doesn't it, Leigh (think about it for a few moments)? So, what lead to the penalty (i.e. Babel's dive) exists doesn't it? If I say that Liverpool wouldn't have gone through if they weren't awarded that penalty, I'm basing that on an actual situation, as Babel's dive would be correctly punished, right?

So, Leigh, answer this question: was Babel's dive an existent situation, or was it an non-existent one?

[Roadpog]

Non existant - He Didn't dive it's just your interpretation of it :D

[Renegade]

Neo - as far as I can tell he was on about your claim of Liverpool not being able to score after, had the penalty not been given. Not the penalty itself.

[NeoKubrick]

Neo - as far as I can tell he was on about your claim of Liverpool not being able to score after, had the penalty not been given. Not the penalty itself.

Nice edit.

No, he was going on about the penalty (read his post carefully). As for after if the penalty had not been given: I've never speculated of the hypothetical situation after, but the fact is, Liverpool wouldn't have gone through without that penalty (i.e. no third goal for Liverpool). By stating that, I'm not speculating upon the hypothetical events after if the penalty had not been given. I mean, that's simple to understand, right?

[Roadpog]

How do you know Liverpool wouldn't of gone through?

[IcemanLeigh]

Neo ya massive div end ;) Was the penalty given? Yes. Was the penalty not given? No. Therefore, surely the penalty being not given is a non existent situation since it didn't happen.

Lets look at it in another way, I will even add a quote for reference:

If I say that Liverpool wouldn't have gone through if they weren't awarded that penalty

Even if they hadn't been awarded the penalty (see above), events afterwards would be altered, there by altering existing situation with a non existing one. Whether or not all the components for the decision to have been given the other way were there, doesnt change the fact that the referee gave the penalty now does it.

In answer to your question, Babel's 'Dive' (which in itself is interpretive but lets not confuse you with too many simple concepts at once shall we) was existing, but correct me if I am wrong, you are not offering an alternative to that happening. The existing situation in which you are reffering to Neo, i.e The penalty, is the referee giving it. (You beleive this decision to be wrong). So answer me this, Neo, was the referee's decision an existing situation? And are you trying to apply a non existent one?

Oh and let's not even go into how 'they would have lost without it' and enjoy watching you trying to explain how that is not trying to apply a non existent situation of what happens after the penalty apposed to the existent situation of what actually happened after the penalty shall we.

No need for the brolly Neo, I assume your head and ass are interchangeable consider the amount of shite you talk.

[IcemanLeigh]

Should refresh this page more, I completely missed Renegade already pointing that blinder out. ;)

[NeoKubrick]

Neo ya massive div end ;) Was the penalty given? Yes. Was the penalty not given? No. Therefore, surely the penalty being not given is a non existent situation since it didn't happen.

Lets look at it in another way, I will even add a quote for reference:



Even if they hadn't been awarded the penalty (see above), events afterwards would be altered, there by altering existing situation with a non existing one. Whether or not all the components for the decision to have been given the other way were there, doesnt change the fact that the referee gave the penalty now does it.

In answer to your question, Babel's 'Dive' (which in itself is interpretive but lets not confuse you with too many simple concepts at once shall we) was existing, but correct me if I am wrong, you are not offering an alternative to that happening. The existing situation in which you are reffering to Neo, i.e The penalty, is the referee giving it. (You beleive this decision to be wrong). So answer me this, Neo, was the referee's decision an existing situation? And are you trying to apply a non existent one?

Oh and let's not even go into how 'they would have lost without it' and enjoy watching you trying to explain how that is not trying to apply a non existent situation of what happens after the penalty apposed to the existent situation of what actually happened after the penalty shall we.

No need for the brolly Neo, I assume your head and ass are interchangeable consider the amount of shite you talk.
Nice edit.

No, he was going on about the penalty (read his post carefully). As for after if the penalty had not been given: I've never speculated of the hypothetical situation after, but the fact is, Liverpool wouldn't have gone through without that penalty (i.e. no third goal for Liverpool). By stating that, I'm not speculating upon the hypothetical events after if the penalty had not been given. I mean, that's simple to understand, right?

I guess not.

The penalty exists; therefore, it's an existent situation. Any contradiction of that is based off of that situation. So, if I say, they didn't receive a penalty, they wouldn't have had an opportunity to score (which is what a penalty is, right?), and ergo, they wouldn't have scored (this doesn't relate to anything that would have happened after as that would be applying non-existent situations to an actual existent one). That's not applying a non-existent situation, dunce. That's negating an actual event and determining the outcome of the negation of that event: no penalty equates to no goal-scoring opportunity. Maybe, this would be more simple for you, Leigh:

If Addy didn't score his goal, Arsenal wouldn't have scored his goal.

See, the outcome. Now, am I applying a non-existent situation, or am I making the logical deduction (if not A, not B)?


You notice how you always start off so confident in these arguments? ;)

[IcemanLeigh]

Lol, brilliant. I hope you enjoy writing these posts Neo because I sure as hell enjoy reading them.

Unfortunately I am currently off out but I thought I would at least humour you with some form of response.

Oh and by the way, absolutely genius explanation on how Liverpool not scoring a third goal would have resulted in the opposite outcome, but you are not speculating on what would or would not have happened afterwards. Pure kubrick. It baffles the mind it really does. You are correct that if the scoreline had remained 2-2 Arsenal would have gone through, but im prety sure (although you will have to correct me becuase unfortunately I am not graced with this special ability to see into the ridiculous world of Neo and his ramblings)if the penalty had not been given, the game would not have gone into a stalemate with both teams stood around doing nothing still as statues. The again, im sure somehow you can explain this too. I look forward to reading it.

Jackanory aint got nothing on Kubrick.

[Renegade]

Whilst you are right Neo on most points, you miss out the crucial factor - Liverpool not getting the penalty does not mean the game would have ended 2-2. It might have done, yes. It also might not. So you saying Liverpool would not have gone through had they not had the penalty is an assumption of what would have happened in the remaining 10 minutes had the penalty not been given.

the fact is, Liverpool wouldn't have gone through without that penalty (i.e. no third goal for Liverpool).


Therefore - you are assuming Liverpool would not have got a goal afterwards. We are saying they might have got a third goal afterwards.

[NeoKubrick]

Dan, I've already addressed this. I haven't speculated on what would have happened after. I said that Liverpool wouldn't have scored from a penalty (i.e. they wouldn't have scored in that instance).

Unfortunately I am currently off out

You do that.


Did anyone seen Gerrard's two dives in the game today against Blackburn?

[Terbinator]

anyone see william gallas and adebayor hand ball the ball?

[Renegade]

Neo - read the quote in my post. You said:

the fact is, Liverpool wouldn't have gone through without that penalty

So, without the Penalty, which would have made the game 2-2 at that time, you're saying with certainty that Liverpool would not have got another goal.

[Dark]

Give up, Neo is an absolute mong.
I like the way he criticises others for being a hack, 'fancying themselves as being a logician' or a pseudo-intellectual. Then he just talks out of his backside, looking down on others like he's some kind of deity.

[NeoKubrick]

Give up, Neo is an absolute mong.
I like the way he criticises others for being a hack, 'fancying themselves as being a logician' or a pseudo-intellectual. Then he just talks out of his backside, looking down on others like he's some kind of deity.

Well, it's better than acting like a wounded ex-girlfriend, eh, Dark? I've moved on other discussions/arguments and other people, Dark; you should move on too. ;)

[Dark]

I'm basing that on this argument you're having now , which before now I was just observing from the sidelines. Not from whatever it was before we argued about before.

I suppose I should go easy though. It must be hard when your team gets less points in 8 games then Sunderland get in 4.

Edit: In fact may as well post this, most of it applies

ARSENAL F.C

End of Season Dinner Dance


Starter
Egg on Face
Seasoned Hash
Frogs legs (past their best)
Spanish Surprise (well beaten)



Main course
Humble Pie
Chump Chops
French (has) Beans
Manager's Beef (not rare)
Catch of the Day - (gutted)

NB: everything is imported, nothing is home grown.




Dessert
Sour Grapes (may be hard to swallow)
Fruitless Tarts
Raspberry Fools
Hard Cheese




Drinks
Bitter
Little Spirit
French Whine
Cabinet Empty 2008

Champagne - sorry none ordered



STRICTLY NO DOUBLES OR TREBLES




NB: drinks should be consumed from glasses as there will be no cups this year.




Guests are asked not to get HAMMERED






Guest speaker:

Rafa Benitez - "What it's like to win the European Cup"

[NeoKubrick]

Whoever wrote that...

Nothing home grown? How many players have come out of Arsenal's youth system? Compare that to Manchester United, Chelsea, and Liverpool. Buy....

[Spindryer]

@Dark: Fair play, i actually "lol" reading that.

[DinnyHoon]

Guest speaker:

Rafa Benitez - "What it's like to win the European Cup"

The rest of the post was pretty humourous, but I lol'd so much at this :D

EDIT: Kubrick - Gerrard and Carra, for Liverpool. We won the youth cup twice on the trot. For Christ's sake, when are you going to stop making an arse of yourself? Arsenal have one decent Englishman in their squad, and they bought him.

[Dark]

Whoever wrote that...

Nothing home grown? How many players have come out of Arsenal's youth system? Compare that to Manchester United, Chelsea, and Liverpool. Buy....

aw, touched a nerve?

[NeoKubrick]

The rest of the post was pretty humourous, but I lol'd so much at this :D

EDIT: Kubrick - Gerrard and Carra, for Liverpool. We won the youth cup twice on the trot. For Christ's sake, when are you going to stop making an arse of yourself? Arsenal have one decent Englishman in their squad, and they bought him.
What are you on about? Training youth teams is not results-driven. It's about producing players for the first-team. And Arsenal more than Liverpool (tell me how much they spent in the summer for fourth place in the league?), Manchester United (Anderson? Nani? Hargreaves?) or Chelsea have produced players for the first-team.

aw, touched a nerve?
No, hun, it didn't. I found it to be too idiotic in its execution to be as funny as it could have been.

[DinnyHoon]

Producing players for the first team you say? OK, well Liverpool's starting 11 today had 2 ex-Academy superstars, Steven Gerrard and Jamie Carragher. How many did Arsenal's entire squad have? Seriously, think before you post. You're making a fool of yourself.

[NeoKubrick]

Producing players for the first team you say? OK, well Liverpool's starting 11 today had 2 ex-Academy superstars, Steven Gerrard and Jamie Carragher. How many did Arsenal's entire squad have? Seriously, think before you post. You're making a fool of yourself.

Er, dipshit, do you know how many players who were in the squad were in Arsenal's youth academy?

You're making a fool of yourself.

Mate, you high-tailed out of this thread, remember?

[BlueHoopedMoose]

I suppose I should go easy though. It must be hard when your team gets less points in 8 games then Sunderland get in 4.
aLOL

@Dark: Fair play, i actually "lol" reading that.

I'm still lol'ing now!

[NeoKubrick]

aLOL

I'm still lol'ing now!
BK?

[BlueHoopedMoose]

BK?
Prefer McDonald's actually, but thanks for the offer. Mwah.

[Xg Corkin]

Manchester United 2 - 1 Arsenal. Ouch, bad week for Arsenal.

Always next year though. :)

[Renegade]

I suppose I should go easy though. It must be hard when your team gets less points in 8 games then Sunderland get in 4.



Haha stunner!