Foxbatt
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2013
- Messages
- 14,297
Ince is a kunt
Neves even said he didnt go down till he knew where the ball wentThe Wolves player took nearly 3 hours to react to the tackle. I think he reacted and rolled around on the pitch after the third replay of the goal.
Absolutely no surprise that MOTD did just that. Last weeks incident was glossed over in seconds with 'never a foul'. Today, the first 3 minutes of the debate was all about how it was a 'blatant foul'. And not one reference to the very comparative incident that went against United last week. Not a surprise, given they were completely contradicting themselves and it would have been a reminder that a huge decision cost United last week so didn't fit their narrative / agenda. B*stards.As someone who thought last weeks was a clear foul then, yeah, this was probably a foul as well. But no more so than the Southampton one. Neither were given, so both goals allowed to stand under the new 'less interference from VAR' policy.
Maybe both should have been ruled out instead, but at least it's a consistent interpretation. The inconsistency will be in the reaction to the incident by the media. This will be deemed a blatant foul by a lot of the sources who last week applauded the Southampton decision, and sly digs made about it going United's way, with very little reference to how last week's went against us. Though I guess there's consistency in their anti-United interpretation of decisions.
No mention of sais climbing in varane for de Gea's save.Absolutely no surprise that MOTD did just that. Last weeks incident was glossed over in seconds with 'never a foul'. Today, the first 3 minutes of the debate was all about how it was a 'blatant foul'. And not one reference to the very comparative incident that went against United last week. Not a surprise, given they were completely contradicting themselves and it would have been a reminder that a huge decision cost United last week so didn't fit their narrative / agenda. B*stards.
So, you do care at least a little bit then?It was a foul but so was last week against Bruno. And I could care less either way.
Couldn't care less. Could care less makes no sense whatsoever.It was a foul but so was last week against Bruno. And I could care less either way.
Yep gotta allow the game to flow and all that...Good payback for the Bruno call last week
This.I think further up the pitch and its a foul no question. His foot went over the ball, he was showing studs, he was off the ground and he clearly connected with his shin pad, that's pretty much the textbook description of a wreckless challenge. It wasn't a leg breaking challenge, but it doesn't have to be for it to be a foul. But we got robbed by the same thing last week, so fecked if I care, more than happy to nick some points in a game like that.
so you are saying you care a bit then?, since you have the capacity to care even less about it?It was a foul but so was last week against Bruno. And I could care less either way.
Souness is a tit, it was hardly a “leg breaker” which he must have said at least 50 times!And is Sourness right? Can Neves count himself lucky that he isn't currently having life-saving surgery?
Poll please mods.
Absolutely no surprise that MOTD did just that. Last weeks incident was glossed over in seconds with 'never a foul'. Today, the first 3 minutes of the debate was all about how it was a 'blatant foul'. And not one reference to the very comparative incident that went against United last week. Not a surprise, given they were completely contradicting themselves and it would have been a reminder that a huge decision cost United last week so didn't fit their narrative / agenda. B*stards.
The MOTD pundits really don’t like Utd, do they?Absolutely no surprise that MOTD did just that. Last weeks incident was glossed over in seconds with 'never a foul'. Today, the first 3 minutes of the debate was all about how it was a 'blatant foul'. And not one reference to the very comparative incident that went against United last week. Not a surprise, given they were completely contradicting themselves and it would have been a reminder that a huge decision cost United last week so didn't fit their narrative / agenda. B*stards.
Anyone But United.The MOTD pundits really don’t like Utd, do they?
Sad ( though not unexpected) to see Roy Kean siding with the truly out- there comments of the Pogba-obsessed Souness, though. Jesus it can be hard work listening to these guys with their weird agenda.
btw, can someone inform a newbie what ABU stands for? I mean, I get the theme but am interested in the terminology….
Predictable- they should at least say the inconsistency shows the confusion over the new and very subjective rules but nope.Absolutely no surprise that MOTD did just that. Last weeks incident was glossed over in seconds with 'never a foul'. Today, the first 3 minutes of the debate was all about how it was a 'blatant foul'. And not one reference to the very comparative incident that went against United last week. Not a surprise, given they were completely contradicting themselves and it would have been a reminder that a huge decision cost United last week so didn't fit their narrative / agenda. B*stards.
Exactly. Love the ABUs all out again. Bring it on. Bring on Ronaldo.Last week we got fecked over by the same decision. The same people on TV weren't complaining when Southampton were the ones who scored from a very similar scenario.
Classic dark arts shite. Obvious to my 10 year old. I was proud of her perception.Never a foul. He clearly keeps running after and not until he looks at the ref or the ball and realises he’s fecked up does he drop like a sack of spuds.
Agreed. He was well past the tackle without even a wince. Looks round then throws himself to the ground as if there was a snipper in the crowd to try to stop the attack.Never a foul. He clearly keeps running after and not until he looks at the ref or the ball and realises he’s fecked up does he drop like a sack of spuds.