Home
Search
Latest topics
Most active topics
Most Viewed Topics
Spurs Legends
Former Spurs Manager: Keith Burkinshaw
Social bookmarking
Bookmark and share the address of The Bill Nicholson Forum on your social bookmarking website
Bookmark and share the address of The Bill Nicholson Forum on your social bookmarking website
Affiliates
Log in
+4
cstmrsking
ionman34
DJSR
BazSpur
8 posters
Gattuso v Joe
BazSpur- Admin
Unfortunately he won't make the return game either, otherwise he may have got some retribution from some Yid running on the pitch and giving him a slap ala Lampard. Flamini is a nasty little f*ck who was never a great footballer when he was with the Goons. He's even less of one now.
That Damned Mark- 2nd Division
I won't begin to defend the tackle in any way, but that's a slight over reaction ion?
Flamini had plenty of opportunities to leave the foot in without being so conspicuous.
Flamini had plenty of opportunities to leave the foot in without being so conspicuous.
anicoll5- Champions League
Unfortunately because Lannoy saw it and issued the yellow there is no chance of increasing the penalty for Flamini - is he out of WHL game ?
anicoll5- Champions League
'Even the meeja were saying he had stored up all that hatred for his time with Arsenal'
Were they? Sounds like an extraordinarily stupid thing to say even for the meeja
Were they? Sounds like an extraordinarily stupid thing to say even for the meeja
ionman34- Champions League
That Damned Mark wrote:I won't begin to defend the tackle in any way, but that's a slight over reaction ion?
Flamini had plenty of opportunities to leave the foot in without being so conspicuous.
And yet he did it and was blatantly obvious.
Or is he 'not that type of player?'
ionman34- Champions League
anicoll5 wrote:'Even the meeja were saying he had stored up all that hatred for his time with Arsenal'
Were they? Sounds like an extraordinarily stupid thing to say even for the meeja
I read it on one of the Red top web pages Nic, The Sun I believe.
And they're not exactly renowned for their smarts now are they.
That Damned Mark- 2nd Division
ionman34 wrote:That Damned Mark wrote:I won't begin to defend the tackle in any way, but that's a slight over reaction ion?
Flamini had plenty of opportunities to leave the foot in without being so conspicuous.
And yet he did it and was blatantly obvious.
Or is he 'not that type of player?'
I don't want to open up a similar passage like the recent one on dirty fouls, but I can't think of another two footed lunge that he's ever done like that before. Did he get clipped by a Spurs player earlier on in the match? Was there some retribution being handed out because of that?
It's difficult for me to comment because I can't, - don't want to either - defend the tackle, - it was a straight red in my book.
ionman34- Champions League
That Damned Mark wrote:ionman34 wrote:That Damned Mark wrote:I won't begin to defend the tackle in any way, but that's a slight over reaction ion?
Flamini had plenty of opportunities to leave the foot in without being so conspicuous.
And yet he did it and was blatantly obvious.
Or is he 'not that type of player?'
I don't want to open up a similar passage like the recent one on dirty fouls, but I can't think of another two footed lunge that he's ever done like that before. Did he get clipped by a Spurs player earlier on in the match? Was there some retribution being handed out because of that?
It's difficult for me to comment because I can't, - don't want to either - defend the tackle, - it was a straight red in my book.
I don't understand, why is it difficult for you to comment? It was a straight red, filthy attempt to harm Charlie. Whether he'd been 'clipped' by a Spurs player or not is irrelevant. He wasn't tackled in such a way that his career could have been ended so what possible justification could he have?
The comment you underlined was put there for a specific reason. Too often do we see comments that he's 'not that type of player', a comment that I think is a load of Bollox when you see this type of challenge. It may well have been the first time in his career that he's lost the plot and tried to maim a fellow professional.
So what?
First or fifieth, the intent was/is there to harm and he should be slaughtered for it.
Imagine a murderer up in the dock stating;
'Well your Honour, I've neer once before thought of cutting a persons throat and it is my first time you know. I'm not really that type of person.'
'Righto', says the Judge, 'Off you go then, but don't do it again you hear?'
Extreme I know, but sometimes you need to use extreme comparisons to highlight a point.
It was the same with Flabby. He tried to hurt Arteta in a fit of pique, whether his disciplinary record, previous to that, was exemplary or not is irrelevant, the intent was there and so he should be punished fittingly.
This fact was conveniently overlooked following my apology to Steve, but it hasn't gone away.
That Damned Mark- 2nd Division
Before this gets out of hand I'd like to go back to my reply to you.
The bit where you claim "...he was out to cripple (the opponent)"
I'm saying that it's (your claim) a bit ott. The instances where serious harm has been intentional (Roy Keane on Alfie Hyland springs to mind) are thankfully few and far between, and I don't think that this was a tackle where the intention was to cripple.
Being reckless as to whether that sort of injury occurs is another matter. The difference being (straight red) a few matches banned, or, well for me anyway for Roy Keane having admitted in his book that 'intent' was there, a lifetime ban, end of.
Now, further to that, if no-one can think of another instance where Flamini has done a two footed lunge like that, then he clearly is 'not that type of player'.
But by pointing that out, it sounds like i'm trying to defend the player, & the tackle, which I'm not, that's why it's 'difficult' for me to comment.
Regarding the Fab 'tackle' on Arteta, it hasn't gone away, just that you're the only one that has that interpretation of it. So no-one's right, and no-one's wrong. We just see it differently.
Legend on Lizzies board claims that Arsenal were completely outplayed by Barca the other night... it's the way he see's it. Looking only through the lilly-white part of your eyes it's of no surprise.
The bit where you claim "...he was out to cripple (the opponent)"
I'm saying that it's (your claim) a bit ott. The instances where serious harm has been intentional (Roy Keane on Alfie Hyland springs to mind) are thankfully few and far between, and I don't think that this was a tackle where the intention was to cripple.
Being reckless as to whether that sort of injury occurs is another matter. The difference being (straight red) a few matches banned, or, well for me anyway for Roy Keane having admitted in his book that 'intent' was there, a lifetime ban, end of.
Now, further to that, if no-one can think of another instance where Flamini has done a two footed lunge like that, then he clearly is 'not that type of player'.
But by pointing that out, it sounds like i'm trying to defend the player, & the tackle, which I'm not, that's why it's 'difficult' for me to comment.
Regarding the Fab 'tackle' on Arteta, it hasn't gone away, just that you're the only one that has that interpretation of it. So no-one's right, and no-one's wrong. We just see it differently.
Legend on Lizzies board claims that Arsenal were completely outplayed by Barca the other night... it's the way he see's it. Looking only through the lilly-white part of your eyes it's of no surprise.
anicoll5- Champions League
On the issue of issuing straight red cards would you agree with me Ion that Palacios' equally vicious stab at hgattuso's knee long after the ball had gone was equally deserving of action ?
Certainly looked to me a shocker but Lannoy just ignored it in spite of Gattuso requiring extensive treatment
Seems to me 10v10 might have reflected better refereeing
Certainly looked to me a shocker but Lannoy just ignored it in spite of Gattuso requiring extensive treatment
Seems to me 10v10 might have reflected better refereeing
BazSpur- Admin
Personally, I couldn't care less whether he was, is or has never been "That type of player" His "Tackle" was reckless to the extreme not just that but he made it clear he didn't give a f*ck by his attitude afterwards. Did he go up to Charlie to see if he was OK? No he didn't. Did he show any concern to the Spurs players or Charlie laying in agony on the floor? No he didn't. What he did do though was make gestures and mouthings to the ref that he thought Charlie wasn't being moved off the pitch quick enough. Not withstanding that every time they tried to move Charlie he was in agony. The Commentator on the night noted that and so did I. He had no pity for Charlie in fact he didn't give a f*ck. The man is a cnut and deserves a lengthy ban.
anicoll5- Champions League
I thought i read Flamini went to the Spuds dressing room after and apologised - hardly excuses the reckless tackle but still a gesture of a man who recognised he had done wrong
BazSpur- Admin
Maybe he did Nic but if that had been me on the night for one thing I never would have tackled like that but if I had I would have been straight there seeing if he was OK.
ionman34- Champions League
anicoll5 wrote:On the issue of issuing straight red cards would you agree with me Ion that Palacios' equally vicious stab at hgattuso's knee long after the ball had gone was equally deserving of action ?
Certainly looked to me a shocker but Lannoy just ignored it in spite of Gattuso requiring extensive treatment
Seems to me 10v10 might have reflected better refereeing
Absolutely. Abit of payback for the grab to Jordans throat?
I couldn't care less. Spurs player or not, if he was out to damage then he needs the book thrown at him.
Now you have your answer Nic, let's address the other two 'dirty b*stards'. Mark seems to believe that Flabby running his studs down Arteta's Achilles is pretty harmless and it's only 'my interpretation' that he was out to harm.
Maybe you also believe that this is a 'Spanish caress' and that Arteta was all overcome with emotion at the intimacy. I guess he wasn't rolling on the ground in pain but ecstacy hey?
anicoll5- Champions League
With respect Ion I saw it - he caught the back of Arteta's calf - a foul one I see regularly - unpleasant but f*ck all compared to breaking an opponents leg or ankle don't you think ?
Arteta writhes in agony - much like a lot of players do - then gets up and gets on with playing football
I have to say I thought Palacios' stab at Gattuso's knee was a damn sight worse
Did you see it ?
Arteta writhes in agony - much like a lot of players do - then gets up and gets on with playing football
I have to say I thought Palacios' stab at Gattuso's knee was a damn sight worse
Did you see it ?
anicoll5- Champions League
On reflection you obviously did not see young Wilson's effort as it happened long before Jordan started his yapping at Gattuso
I lurve the English meeja take on that btw
"ten reasons not to mess with Joe Jordan" lol
The schoolboys have taken over the bike sheds
I lurve the English meeja take on that btw
"ten reasons not to mess with Joe Jordan" lol
The schoolboys have taken over the bike sheds
ionman34- Champions League
anicoll5 wrote:With respect Ion I saw it - he caught the back of Arteta's calf - a foul one I see regularly - unpleasant but f*ck all compared to breaking an opponents leg or ankle don't you think ?
With respect Nic, you didn't see it very clearly then. He started at the calf and ended at the ankle. It is NOT a foul you see regularly at all and, when you do see it, it is normally carried out by those 'undesirables' that both you and I would like to see ejected from the game ne-c'est-pas? As for the tackles that break legs and ankles, when deliberate then again, the book should be thrown at these players and, quoting from your own comments, they should be out for the same period of time that it takes their 'victim' to recover.
The point you are glossing over here is intent. If they intend to harm then they should get slaughtered by the FA. There's a certain amount of ambiguity involved if a player is injured in a 50/50 challenge as the challenge may be genuine, but there is no ambiguity involved when a player runs his studs down the back of another players leg when the ball is a good 10 feet away.
Intent Nic. Flabby INTENDED' to run his studs down Artetas Achilles. To claim any different then puts him in the same 'clumsy oaf' bracket as the journeymen players and we both know that Flabby has far more control of his feet than that.
Quit trying to shift the focus onto Wilson when Flabby is the subject matter.
Arteta writhes in agony - much like a lot of players do - then gets up and gets on with playing football
Because, thank the Heavens, Flabby failed.
Failure doesn't lessen the intent though.
I have to say I thought Palacios' stab at Gattuso's knee was a damn sight worse
Why? If both are deliberate attempts to harm then where is the difference? Damaging a knee or damaging an Achilles, both have the potential to end a career so stop trying to whiten Flabby's dark deed.
Did you see it ?
In all honesty I didn't. I do, however, have the game recorded and will take a further look at it. I have already stated that, if he has done so, then he should have the book thrown at him.
Do you have an idea as to what time in the match it happened?
Unlike yourself and your wingman, I'll make no excuses for a Spurs player if he has deliberately gone out of his way to harm another, regardless of who it was. My view is that any player who premeditates serious harm to another is pondscum. If he's wearing the Lillywhite then the sooner he's f*cked off the better.
I'd hope you have the decency to hold to the same beliefs and condemn you Captain for the intent, in much the same way that I'll condemn Palacios for his.
anicoll5- Champions League
The Palacios assault occured within two or three minutes of the Corluka foul
Do have a look at it - it is right in there with Essien/hamann at Anfield - the ball is long gone - a deliberate effort to injure - have a look - seems to me your Honduran has lost his head
As for the Cesc foul on Arteta where do you propose we gp from here. ?
You see it as the worst of all possible fouls - deliberate - vicious etc and Cesc should receive a punishment of ...........?
I see it as a run of the mill foul and dealt with by the ref on the spot ok
Do have a look at it - it is right in there with Essien/hamann at Anfield - the ball is long gone - a deliberate effort to injure - have a look - seems to me your Honduran has lost his head
As for the Cesc foul on Arteta where do you propose we gp from here. ?
You see it as the worst of all possible fouls - deliberate - vicious etc and Cesc should receive a punishment of ...........?
I see it as a run of the mill foul and dealt with by the ref on the spot ok
ionman34- Champions League
[quote="anicoll5"]The Palacios assault occured within two or three minutes of the Corluka foul
Do have a look at it - it is right in there with Essien/hamann at Anfield - the ball is long gone - a deliberate effort to injure - have a look - seems to me your Honduran has lost his head
I'll check it out. Interesting that you label it as assault. Ball long gone, deliberate effort to injure. Direct comparisons methinks.
As for the Cesc foul on Arteta where do you propose we gp from here. ?
I don't. The match officials missed it and the FA has taken no further action so there is no further to go. It would be nice to see you acknowledge it for what it was though, a cowardly 'assault' from behind with the deliberate intent to injure or maim. You seem to have your deflector shield set up to redirect to Palacios. Well hold that thought and we'll debate Wilson after I've given his 'assault' a good look. In the meantime, let's concentrate on Flabby and his a
'assault'.
Malicious, cowardly and an attempt to injure a fellow professional?
You see it as the worst of all possible fouls - deliberate - vicious etc and Cesc should receive a punishment of ...........?
The punishment should be extensive, minimum 8 match ban. How long did Cantona get for his 'Kung Fu'assault on the fan? Maybe not that length but along those lines. How long did Ferdinand get for missing a drug test? Certainly not nearly as bad a 'crime' as assault with the intent to injure wouldn't you say?
How long would you give to a player who launched a cowardly 'assault' on a fellow professional with the express purpose of injuring him?
I see it as a run of the mill foul and dealt with by the ref on the spot ok
If it were run of the mill then surely I'd have seen similar wouldn't you say?
I haven't and I'd be interested on feedback from anyone else as to whether this is a common occurence. Despite how you are trying to paint it, I don't go around rabidly condemning players out of hand, even goon players. I was angered by the response on the other thread because you seem to feel that, because Arteta was relatively uninjured, that the 'assault' was run of the mill and, therefore, acceptable. You gloss over the intent and the cowardly nature of the 'assault' and why?
Because it is Cesc Fabregas.
It's simple really Nic. I know it was cowardly, you know it was cowardly, everyone else knows it was cowardly. Just admit it and we'll move on to the merits of castrating Wilson Palacios for his heinous crimes.
Do have a look at it - it is right in there with Essien/hamann at Anfield - the ball is long gone - a deliberate effort to injure - have a look - seems to me your Honduran has lost his head
I'll check it out. Interesting that you label it as assault. Ball long gone, deliberate effort to injure. Direct comparisons methinks.
As for the Cesc foul on Arteta where do you propose we gp from here. ?
I don't. The match officials missed it and the FA has taken no further action so there is no further to go. It would be nice to see you acknowledge it for what it was though, a cowardly 'assault' from behind with the deliberate intent to injure or maim. You seem to have your deflector shield set up to redirect to Palacios. Well hold that thought and we'll debate Wilson after I've given his 'assault' a good look. In the meantime, let's concentrate on Flabby and his a
'assault'.
Malicious, cowardly and an attempt to injure a fellow professional?
You see it as the worst of all possible fouls - deliberate - vicious etc and Cesc should receive a punishment of ...........?
The punishment should be extensive, minimum 8 match ban. How long did Cantona get for his 'Kung Fu'assault on the fan? Maybe not that length but along those lines. How long did Ferdinand get for missing a drug test? Certainly not nearly as bad a 'crime' as assault with the intent to injure wouldn't you say?
How long would you give to a player who launched a cowardly 'assault' on a fellow professional with the express purpose of injuring him?
I see it as a run of the mill foul and dealt with by the ref on the spot ok
If it were run of the mill then surely I'd have seen similar wouldn't you say?
I haven't and I'd be interested on feedback from anyone else as to whether this is a common occurence. Despite how you are trying to paint it, I don't go around rabidly condemning players out of hand, even goon players. I was angered by the response on the other thread because you seem to feel that, because Arteta was relatively uninjured, that the 'assault' was run of the mill and, therefore, acceptable. You gloss over the intent and the cowardly nature of the 'assault' and why?
Because it is Cesc Fabregas.
It's simple really Nic. I know it was cowardly, you know it was cowardly, everyone else knows it was cowardly. Just admit it and we'll move on to the merits of castrating Wilson Palacios for his heinous crimes.
ionman34- Champions League
OK Nic, I did as I said I would and have reviewed the Palacios 'assault' on Gattuso.
Having watched it a number of times, from many angles on ESPN and at various speeds, I have to say that you really are grasping at straws in an effort to deflect the focus from Flamini and Flabby.
Palacios is by no means an Angel, but when you equate him hurdling Gattuso's leg to a 'stab at injuring him' then it becomes apparent just what you are up to.
He made no contact whatsoever. Gattuso was looking to get him booked, or at least to set him up for a booking later. There was f*ck all wrong with him.
Now his 'extensive treatment' came after he'd gone after Palacios, with no visible limp I might add, then chased the ref to 'voice his distress and discontent', before flopping on the ground, a full 4 minutes later I might add, to receive treatment for a wound that no one else could see.
I think they should change his nickname from the Dog to Wolverine.
His mutant healing powers are extraordinary.
So, no intent there from Wilson. Had he intended anything, Gattuso would have been lying on the floot with the bottom half of his right leg in Jordans lap. He was stationary, a sitting duck so to speak. Wilson could have truly crippled him had he wished.
He obviously didn't.
Oh and BTW, the 'assault' <snigger> happened on exactly 60 minutes. The Jordan 'yapping' incident happened on 54.
Who wasn't watching?
Having watched it a number of times, from many angles on ESPN and at various speeds, I have to say that you really are grasping at straws in an effort to deflect the focus from Flamini and Flabby.
Palacios is by no means an Angel, but when you equate him hurdling Gattuso's leg to a 'stab at injuring him' then it becomes apparent just what you are up to.
He made no contact whatsoever. Gattuso was looking to get him booked, or at least to set him up for a booking later. There was f*ck all wrong with him.
Now his 'extensive treatment' came after he'd gone after Palacios, with no visible limp I might add, then chased the ref to 'voice his distress and discontent', before flopping on the ground, a full 4 minutes later I might add, to receive treatment for a wound that no one else could see.
I think they should change his nickname from the Dog to Wolverine.
His mutant healing powers are extraordinary.
So, no intent there from Wilson. Had he intended anything, Gattuso would have been lying on the floot with the bottom half of his right leg in Jordans lap. He was stationary, a sitting duck so to speak. Wilson could have truly crippled him had he wished.
He obviously didn't.
Oh and BTW, the 'assault' <snigger> happened on exactly 60 minutes. The Jordan 'yapping' incident happened on 54.
Who wasn't watching?
anicoll5- Champions League
Then your eyesight is clearly defective - it was a blatant attempt by Palacios to injure a fellow professional long after the ball had gone
anicoll5- Champions League
And not a word of commendation from you - terribly disappointing I think - what with your high standards and all that
ionman34- Champions League
Wrong again Nic. In your shoddy attempt to fog the issue regarding Flabby's cowardice, you are once again scraping the barrel of lame excuses.
I currently have the recording playing in front of me. On exactly 60 minutes, that's 60 mins 00 seconds, Palacios hurdles Gattuso's leg.
Like Ed Moses on his way to another Gold, he makes no contact whatsoever.
Unlike the cowardly Spaniard, he did not premeditate an 'assault' with the intent to cause injury.
Move along now, before your credibility drags you out by the ear in a last ditch salvage effort.
» Sky Sports News Links
» Hello....the site is still alive!
» 17 million deal for Musacchio
» How to Block Adverts on this Site !
» This is Our Season
» 'appy New Season
» Time to say goodbye
» Crouchinio