A new perspective, after a few days of consideration. 1) Please explain the tackle of Ruud over Vieira. Americans had Sky to thank for, we only got one angle. And yet, I read fifty different versions in my two MBs. Many of them were blatantly incorrect. 2) Please explain the history behind this row. Avoid marketing, statistics, who's a hot shot, the better diver, etc. Stick to THIS row. 3) Your opinions, please, and possible consequences. 1. Pat was heading to penalty area when ball was passed by [insert name of superstar] to Ruud, and RVN jumped up to reach it. English fans explained it as a LEGAL tackle or challenge, when a striker jumps up for the ball and the rival ducks down. Fine, but in this case, I see that Pat was not aware of the ball when Ruud climbed over him, using him as a trampoline. [according to Webster, when Ruud came down, he locked his leg and hurt Vieira] 2. last season, ManU-Arse at Old Trafford, as Ruud marched to penalty area, out of nowhere Keown came up to him (in same marching disposition) and slapped his face. Keown was charged with violent misconduct after FA reviewed the tape, received a penalty (5,000 pounds) and a big warning. There's more. I have the feeling that yellow cards have little significance on the pitch anymore. As a result, this season the FA set new standards with referees, most dramatic with keepers, but with yellow cards too. FA wants refs to adhere strictly to the rules. Arsenal launched a complaint against Bennett after the Community Shield, perhaps informally, but it was there. When the FA selected Bennett to referee this match, it was their "informal" answer: "Shut up!" (With this in mind, Webster has little grounds to claim that Bennett was hungry for power, unable to control players, etc.) 3. My opinions (not well-founded but hopefully useful?) Whether or not it was an evil foul or legal tackle, I was stunned by Vieira's enraged reaction. Now I believe the ref did everything right. I admit I was misled by Webster's article on Fox's site and fans' complaints about refereeing. Ref is supposed to "keep the game afloat," after all, he's on a timer too. See, Arsenal players and Wenger (my biggest idols) are so haughty taughty (sp?) to think they're such experts in the game that they don't need anyone telling them how to play it: This includes a ref and a striker from an opposing team. As to the ref, all they can do is complain; for a rival, they can call him a cheat. Vieira was angry at the tackle and lashed out. But then he was furious at the ref, not for receiving a red, but because the Ref did not red card Ruud. Again, it's others' decision making that Arsenal can't tolerate. Then, on a separate issue, Keown and co. were angry that "things were not going their way." Even now they can't admit that Man United are a formidable side. What did they expect, that they would play Leicester's twins? ManU are last season's champs and SAF has improved the team over the summer (two great oustings, arrival of great youngsters and one of the finest keepers I have ever seen in my life!). In this respect, even the most devout Gooner cannot but side with Man United on this. They will be massively disappointed when the penalties come down hard (including Nick Webster), because the FA do act in the best interest of the sport, not to harm a particular club. They don't gain anything by squashing Man United's competition. It makes the sport quite boring. Sunday's events were twofold: Keown's adolescent insistence on humiliating a fellow player, lack of total respect, putting himself above anyone else as the expert and the best there is. Well surprise, there are some strikers who can break his defensive tactics and he is irritated by it - a sign that he's not that great of a player. When Arsenal STANK and sank against Inter, their shame reverted into hooliganism on Sunday. For a 37 year old with some 20 years of experience, he is pretty insecure. And Arsenal's defiance against the FA, the authority on matters related to sporstmanship and behaviour, will come down hard on them. If I'm right about the previous histories behind the row, I can imagine the FA deducting points only because Arsenal do not come to reason. They are putting the English game into disrepute, and it will cost them dearly.
Sorry, but I don't see anything said here that hasn't been said a number of times already. On the RvN-Viera play, I'm not sure what you watch, but I saw a number of different angles on it through Fox Sports World.
1) Ruud makes no attempt to go for the ball and simply jumps up and sticks his foot into Vieira's back. He knew what he was doing. 2) Keown does not slap van Nistelrooy in the face. He pushes him in the back, ala Lauren, after van Nistelrooy (deliberately IMO steps on his foot). van Nistelrooy then predictably goes down like a sack of spuds (no not tottenham).
Which game? Watch the replay of last year's match, Arsenal at Manchester, Keown just slapped him out of the blue, and the scandal quickly died down, but on many messageboards, the question arose of whether video replay should be admissible. This was violent misconduct because Keown attacked him without justification. The article is on line in the London Insider, with the photo.
1) If there was one player who made no attempt to go for the ball it was Vera. Is it not strange that he chose not to jump for the ball despite being in the better position and having the ability to time his jump better having seen RVN jump in from a distance? Could it be possible that Vera was "making a back" for RVN to land on and fall awkwardly? 2) I think you'll find it was Lauren who stepped on RVN's foot....
I don't think you'll hear anything new on this one. Most of the die-hard gunner fans will claim innonence, unfairness, et al about the incident. 2 ManU players have also been charged. The FA's going after everyone, it just happens that more Arsenal players, 6, were in the wrong.
Re: Which game? I don't need to see the photo, i've seen the incident. van Nistelrooy backs into Keown and steps on his foot.
Jesus H Christ, i'm beginning to wonder how many of you actually play football. Vieira was going to control the ball on his chest. And with regards to the "slap" i was referring to an incident last season. Where Keown was fined for pushing/slapping van Nistelrooy.
I agree. It's pretty hard to play the ball when you have a big ol' dutchman planting his butt inbetween your shoulder blades.
Really? I always thought Vera was just over 6foot tall.... Had I known he was 9 foot 6 I would have sent him a note to join up in the NBA.... I'm beginning to wonder how blinkered gooner fans are - is this myopia a pre-condition for allegiance (a la Whinger)
And this can't go without comment....That is the most pathetic attempt to spell VIEIRA i have ever seen.
So you have to be stationery to control the ball on your chest, you can't move backwards a couple of steps? When was the last time you saw the incident? The ball falls just behind him. Your the one looking like a rank amatuer here, mate.
Why is it so hard to accept the possibility that Vera intentionally did not jump to ensure RVN landed on his back (and therefore run the chance of falling badly and injuring himself)? This would hardly be the first time this had happened - I have seen comments from a couple of ex-professionals saying that their reading on the incident was that Vera did not jump on purpose (both of which are un-related to either Arsenal or Man U).
Because it's stupid that Vieira would be dumb enough to want to intentionally foul van Nistelrooy just outside his box, when he could quite easily take the ball on his chest and carry on upfield. You are stretching the realms of reality to back-up up your stance that van Nistelrooy is completely innocent of any wrong-doing. Everyone who has half-an-ikling about football would know what Vieira was preparing to do. Vieira even said it himself.
Vera did not move until RVN jumped into him (by the way mate - your sense of humour bypass was a 100% success, Vera is spelt that way intentionally). I saw the incident about 20 minutes ago - and yes, the ball falls just behind Vera. But then again - Vera falls a fair distance from the original impact point seeing as RVN had just hit him at a fair rate of knots. You'd have landed a good few feet from where you started as well....
Why is that stupid? Vera intentionally kicked out at RVN just outside his box - how is it any different. I have had another look at the incident and your belief that Vera could have chested that is laughable. If he was ten foot tall, maybe - in the real world, no. In this instance RVN was guilty of jumping in to Vera and deservedly received a yellow card. That is as far as his guilt goes in this case. In other cases, yes RVN dives - he is a professional footballer and that is the state of the modern game.
Whatever, this is a clearly pointless argument, you concucted a HIGHLY-unlikely and quite frankly stupid scenario (under the circumstances) to exonerate your hero van Nistelrooy. And your "intentional" mispelling of Vieira, will go down in history as one of the greatest "wind-ups" in living memory.....
If you don't like having your initial post contradicted then don't post it in the first place. Why is it so highly-unlikely/stupid? Phil Neal and Alan Hansen were the ex-pros who stated it was a possibility (they both did not understand why Vera had not jumped for the header) - both of these guys have experience which means their opinion should not just be discounted in the way you have (played much professional football have you?). There is nothing to exonerate RVN for - he committed a foul and got carded, end of story. He is not responsible for the lack of discipline which was initiated by Vera and which resulted in an ugly scene at the end of the match. Why is it that Gooners appear incapable of accepting any criticism of their players when they have been clearly seen to cross the line? And if you find a whimsical mis-spelling of Vieira to be as you described then I recommend you get out more mate - you appear to lead a very sad life.....
Vieira reacted to what he believed to be a deliberate foul and kick by van Nistelrooy. There is no comparison between this and your loony concuction. Look, when the ball is in the air and you have decided that you wish to take the ball on your chest, you move back to reduce the height at which you attempt to control the ball, and if necessary you jump up slightly to take the ball. Any of the other basics moves you want me to take you through? Or do you want to argue the point with Vieira himself who said after the game that he was about to control the ball on his chest before van Nistelrooy decided to use his as a landing pad.
Thats fine mate - if that's your opinion then you are welcome to it. My opinion is that I found it strange Vera did not challenge for the ball initially. This is a view shared by Alan Hansen and Phil Neal. I do not doubt that Vera reacted to the foul. You explain perfectly well the process in taking a ball on the chest. Problem is your description and Vera's action do not align. Vera did not move back a couple of steps and then jump slightly. Vera stood stock still until RVN landed on him. Those are hardly the actions of someone about to chest the ball - especially a ball which is about to travel about two feet above Vera's head. And of course - Vera's post-match interview must be held-up as a example of a 100% honest statement. I mean, he had nothing to gain whatsoever by trying to pass the blame onto another player did he? Vera an angel - of course he is, even though he now holds the record for red cards in the premiership.....
Where is your criticism? You made up a half-assed story to justify van Nistelrooy landing on and kicking Vieira. I then proceeded to counter your ridiculous assumption, i stated my case backed-up with reference to VIERIA'S own statements. I have done my bit, if you wish to carry on with your stance so be it, i doubt i'll be the first person to think you are less than competent. And as you say, i may have a humour by-pass but you clearly wouldn't know sarcasm if it rode on your back and kicked you in the ribs.
Just because Vieira intended to chest the ball down does not mean that an opposing player can not challenge for the ball in the air as well. Vieira turned his back as he was out of position, Ruud came down akward/clumsy, Vieira was still probably upset over his undeserved yellow and kicked out.... I can't believe we are still on about this. There's nothing more to say until after the appeals are made and the punishments dished out...
Last post on this matter, in response you anyway. Vieira prepares to chest the ball, you can clearly see this by the stance he adopts. Unfortunately before he can carry it out van Nistelrooy fouled him. Also Vieira has no reason to lie about what he attempted to do, he was fouled. End of. It has nothing to do with his reaction to the "challenge" from van Nistelrooy as he no reason to justify how and why he was fouled. He simply stated what happened in his opinion after being fouled. And i somehow think Vieira has a more detailed understanding of his own intentions than Phil Neal or Alan Hansen.
Oh dear - recommend you take 5 minutes to pull those twisted knickers out of your arse mate... Ok - so the fact I shared an OPINION (not a "made-up half assed story") and highlighted this was an opinion shared by two highly-respected ex-pros is a ridiculous assumption. You respond with an opinion backed up by the statement of a player who is being investigated for improper conduct. And I'm the one who'll appear incompetent????? Keep taking the pills mate....
I totally agree, but i would add Vieira turnt his back as he was about to feel the full-weight of van Nistelrooy's body. It's a natural reaction to turn away. That does not diminish what he intially attempted to do during the process of play...what happened after it stopped has long been discussed.