Soccer Thread 2011-2012

[RainMaker]

Played great defense until they put Ream and Specter in.

Still no semblance of an attack, but I'll keep waiting for this master Klinsmann to take shape.

[Easy Mac]

Altidore looked ok
Dempsey was Dempsey
Shea linked well with Chandler, but was running on fumes after 40 minutes.
Beasley looked dangerous, but did nt kink with Chandler
Beckerman is useless.
Edu looked a little rough on the ball
Williams was solid, but disappeared at the half
Same for Chandler
Cherundolo was too slow for today's game
Onyewu may be back
Boca was his quite, steady self
Buddle was his useless self
Ream was unsteady on the cross, but Ok otherwise
Spector didn't add much.
Bradley actually looked good, and was more dangerous on set pieces than Donovan.

[Warhammer]

So what is everyone's opinion of Klinsmann so far?

This was the first I had seen the team since he took over, and I thought the ball movement was much better than under Bradley. That said, you could tell many of the players are not used to playing on the ball as much, or maybe trying to make plays while on the ball. I thought there was much better flow, than passing it up and hoping for someone to make a move.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Played great defense until they put Ream and Specter in.

Still no semblance of an attack, but I'll keep waiting for this master Klinsmann to take shape.

I thought the first half they had a really nice attack going. Poor around the box though and continued to settle for longer range shots. I didn't see the 2nd half but I liked what I saw in the 1st half, especially since it was minus Landon.

[SirFozzie]

Former CONCACAF head honcho Jack Warner is done. Bin Hamman is done. And the 15 in front of FIFA right now are done:

Former Fifa vice-president Jack Warner is caught on tape offering 'gifts’ of £25,000 to Caribbean delegates - Telegraph

““When Mohamed Bin Hammam asked to come to the Caribbean he wanted to bring some silver plaques and wooden trophies and bunting and so on, and told me to bring [these] for 30 people would be too much luggage. I told him he did not need to bring anything but if he wanted to bring anything to bring something equivalent to the value of the gift that he brought.

“I said to him if you bring cash, I don’t want you to give cash to anybody, but when you do you can give it to the CFU and the CFU will give it to its members. Because I don’t want [it] to even remotely appear that anyone has any obligation to vote for you because of what gifts you have given them, and he fully accepted that.” ”

and

“I know there are some people here who believe they are more pious than thou. If you are pious go to a church friends, but the fact is that our business is our business.”

“If there is anybody here who has a conscience and wishes to send back the money I am willing to take the money and give it back to him at any moment.”

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

This was the first I had seen the team since he took over, and I thought the ball movement was much better than under Bradley. That said, you could tell many of the players are not used to playing on the ball as much, or maybe trying to make plays while on the ball. I thought there was much better flow, than passing it up and hoping for someone to make a move.

As I said at the time - this is going to be painful initially, but if the players have faith (and enough skill) then it'll start taking shape eventually ....

Movement under Bradley was better, but very predictable and easy to defend against if you were up against a decent team .... the decision was made to try and make the step up from predictable and competant, making a team competant and well organised isn't that hard* making a team which can truly compete with the best IS.

*If you watch English soccer you'll often find lower league sides (Division 2 say) rise from that level up to the Championship without changing much in the way of playing staff because they gain a manager who organises them competantly and drills them to play in a way which plays to their particular strengths ... like Bradley did with the US.
However once such a team makes it into the Premiership they tend to get relegated fast, they're good, organised but lack the unpredictable nature required to truly compete at the best levels.

[SirFozzie]

Euro 2012 playoffs set:

Bosnia-Portugal
Estonia-Ireland
Czech Rep-Montenegro
Turkey-Croatia


My thoughts: Turkey-Croatia should be the best, Portugal and Ireland got dream draws for the playoffs.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

So what is everyone's opinion of Klinsmann so far?

This was the first I had seen the team since he took over, and I thought the ball movement was much better than under Bradley. That said, you could tell many of the players are not used to playing on the ball as much, or maybe trying to make plays while on the ball. I thought there was much better flow, than passing it up and hoping for someone to make a move.

You can certainly tell the tactical mindset difference.

And you can just as certainly tell a lot of these guys aren't used to it just yet. They still tend to regress towards the relatively static long-balling from time to time. Just gonna take time to drill that out of their heads.

I'm actually enjoying watching him try out a whole slew of different guys. Brek Shea in particular seems to be pretty impressive, making up for the pain that is watching a few of the other young guys he's tried.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Estonia-Ireland

My thoughts: Turkey-Croatia should be the best, Portugal and Ireland got dream draws for the playoffs.

Put it this way - My Irish roots are smiling tonight

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

You can certainly tell the tactical mindset difference.

And you can just as certainly tell a lot of these guys aren't used to it just yet. They still tend to regress towards the relatively static long-balling from time to time. Just gonna take time to drill that out of their heads.

I'm actually enjoying watching him try out a whole slew of different guys. Brek Shea in particular seems to be pretty impressive, making up for the pain that is watching a few of the other young guys he's tried.

But he hasn't really tried new guys. Shea is the only one you can point to, but it's not like he had firmly established himself as far as needing playing time while Bradley was in power (especially based on the formation we played, where Shea would have needed to play instead of Dempsey or Donovan).

The only guys getting runs now that weren't before are Fiscal (poor), Beckerman (poor), Rogers (poor), Chandler (Bradley looked set to have him in the team), and Williams (not an American yet). Edu and Torres have gotten more time, but I'm not sure either has really shown they're even as good as Mike Bradley, let alone better.

Everyone else are the same guys Bradley played.

[whomario]

Rooney banned for all 3 group matches : https://www.google.com/url?url=http:...FvadYw&cad=rja

[Big Fo]

That's good news, Rooney will be fresher for the start of next season. Maybe England could even get knocked out in the group stage so he doesn't play for them at all this summer.

[sovereignstar v2]

No big deal. Phil Jones and Smalling are so versatile that I'm sure they could play in his absence.

[bulletsponge]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

That's good news, Rooney will be fresher for the start of next season. Maybe England could even get knocked out in the group stage so he doesn't play for them at all this summer.

to be fair, he usually doesnt show up for major tournaments anyways. he always books his ticket for his vacation before and plans on going out early

[DeToxRox]

Remember when you read that Joe Corona was all set to play for Mexico and pass on the chance to play for his actual country of birth, the United States?
Well, scratch that one. It seems the LA-born Corona is ready to follow in the footsteps of Jose Torres and Edgar Castillo and bypass Mexico to play for the United States.
Sources have told me that Corona plans on playing for the United States, and is merely awaiting a call-up to end the speculation about his national team allegiance.
So what happened to Corona and Mexico? Word I'm getting is that Mexico didn't exactly court Corona beyond a Under-22 call-up in August, and with the wealth of riches Mexico boasts, both on the wings and in attacking midfield roles, you can see why 'El Tri' might not putting the hard push on Corona.

This development is great news for the United States, which gets another quality young attacking midfielder, and another Olympic Team prospect. That is, as soon as Jurgen Klinsmann calls Corona in. He'll have two chances in November to do just that. Klinsmann might want to hurry because while Corona is said to be ready to play for the United States now, you know how quickly players can change their minds.

[sovereignstar v2]

We're not linking to articles/sources anymore?

[Big Fo]

I don't know what SAF was thinking with that team selection. Even if Rooney wasn't in the right frame of mind to play, why leave Nani out too? In 65 minutes that X! didn't even get a shot on target. The draw was a fortunate result today.

[Marc Vaughan]

A good day for football so far - second half of the Liverpool v Man Utd match was cracking and now City match so far has been good (especially as my missus is a City fan ).

Roll on Brighton turning their poor form around against Hull later today and all will be well with the world

[whomario]

yeah, the ManU-Liverpool game was fun

I´m looking forward to tomorrow´s Lazio-AS Roma derby, hope Klose does well

my team Dortmund got a big win away from home beating 2nd place Werder Bremen 2-0 despite loosing Perisic (who scored a wonderfull goal for the 1:0 lead) to a yellow/red just a minute into the 2nd half.
If they can make better use of their scoring chances they´ll be fine (in Marseille for example they could have easily scored 5 or so goals ...).

Bayern Munich is just steamrolling right now, beat Hertha Berlin 4-0 (scored 3 goals in the first 12 minutes ...). Still only conceded 1 goal all season ... (14 games all competitions)

[sovereignstar v2]

Pretty much a shadow of my own celebration.

[SirFozzie]

WOW.

Fox gets 2018 and 2022 World Cup TV rights, with a big that absolutely BLEW ESPN's away (I'm talking 4 or or five TIMES as much as the ESPN bid)

[SirFozzie]

and other news, looks like Mancini is not going to get his wish as no one on the Man City bench is backing up his story about Tevez refusing to play, and Man City had to reduce the charges against Tevez

[sovereignstar v2]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

and other news, looks like Mancini is not going to get his wish as no one on the Man City bench is backing up his story about Tevez refusing to play, and Man City had to reduce the charges against Tevez

And you heard this where?

[SirFozzie]

Manchester City back down over Carlos Tevez allegedly refusing to play - News - MirrorFootball.co.uk

\But the Mirror has learned from City sources that sensational evidence will show no one at the club has backed Mancini's version of events that night.

In fact, Tevez will not even be charged with refusing to play in Munich, as even Mancini's assistants Brian Kidd and David Platt and fitness coach Ivan Carminati were unable to back their boss up.

Tevez will be accused only of "refusing to carry out Roberto Mancini's and Ivan Carminati's instructions to resume warming up with a view to playing in the match".

City's ability to hit Tevez with a severe punishment may now be compromised by the reduced charge and the confused picture of events the written evidence is believed to present.

And it leaves Mancini in an uncomfortable situation as City head into their eagerly-awaited derby showdown with Manchester United at Old Trafford on Sunday.

Sources say that written submissions from City staff and players paint a vivid picture of a bench in a state of chaos and uproar at the Allianz Arena.

Mancini was 'nervous' because City were 2-0 down and angry because striker Edin Dzeko had gestured angrily at him when he was substituted in the 55th minute.

At one point, Mancini is even believed to have shouted instructions at Tevez in Italian, even though the Argentine striker does not speak the language.

And it is thought that, in his testimony, Carminati admits that when he asked Tevez to warm up, the player replied, "I'm ready."

Mancini's evidence is believed to show that he is the only person on the bench that night sticking to the story that Tevez refused to play.

Sources say he maintains that Tevez said 'no' when he asked him for a second time to get off the bench, but even Mancini admits it was so noisy in the stadium that it was hard to hear what was being said.

[sovereignstar v2]

Hmmm. Wonder if we'll hear more when this blows over and he's moved on. Something doesn't add up. I don't trust English newspapers any more than a stray cat.

[Coffee Warlord]

Newcastle keeps on rolling. I'm loving it. Doubt it'll last, but I'm enjoying it.

[whomario]

so on a stupidity scale of 1-10, where would Balotelli rank ? 12 ?

Balotelli and pals set his house on fire with fireworks, no one surprised - Dirty Tackle - World Soccer*Blog - Yahoo! Sports

[sovereignstar v2]

ManUre stinking up Old Trafford. Fun stuff.

[Coffee Warlord]

Quite enjoying it. Combo of nice attacks and miserable defending from United is making my day.

[Coffee Warlord]

Jesus. 5-1.

[sovereignstar v2]

AHAHAHAHAHAHA

At least you got the Community Shield!

[sovereignstar v2]

Is there a United fan left in the stadium???

[Coffee Warlord]

Six!

[sovereignstar v2]

6-1 WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[sovereignstar v2]

Time to dance!

[TroyF]

Shocking result. I didn't think I'd see that in my lifetime.

Were I a Man U fan, I'd be gutted by how they simply gave up in the final 10 minutes of that game. Not being a fan and actually being a hater, it made my heart sing.

Gunners get a W (after giving up yet another set piece goal). Up to 7th in the table now. The scary, scary part is relying so heavily on glass man. If he stays healthy, things could be good and they could challenge for that CL spot. He gets hurt, there aren't a lot of other options now.

[Oilers9911]

I'm no Man City fan, mostly because their supporters have suddenly become almost as obnoxious as United supporters despite having won hardly anything for decades....but damn that's a sweet result!

[sovereignstar v2]

Chelsea down to 9 men and are down 1 goal to QPR with a full half to go.

[Critch]

Now I hate Chelsea as much as any normal person, but I think the ref has some money on QPR here.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Were I a Man U fan, I'd be gutted by how they simply gave up in the final 10 minutes of that game.

Why? The most vulnerable time for teams reduced to ten men are the last few minutes of the game. Often a team will hold out til 75-80 minutes but fatigue kicks in and they lose a couple of goals. In this case three of the goals came in the last 4 minutes - 89th, 91st and 93rd minutes.

What this game illustrates is that a team reduced to ten men has first to shore up its defence against the increased pressure it will experience and that even Utd cannot go to gung-ho attack particularly against a team as good as Man City - to be more exact a team that has the attacking players City have that can exploit defensive weakness ruthlessly. It must also conserve energy in order to sustain its defence until the final whistle. Utd ignored both of these points as Ferguson has now admitted and paid the price.

For me this was yet another game that was ruined by this almost unique aspect of soccer to punish players by reducing the numbers in a team - at half-time with City a goal up I was anticipating a terrific second half that was destroyed within a minute when the task for one side became mission impossible. But with a sending off the game ceases to be a 'match" at all and, as other sports do, there needs to be another form of punishment. Have the manager replace the offending player and deal with him in a disciplinary tribunal, in the case of the "last man offence" award a penalty regardless of whether it's in or out of the penalty box (award a penalty goal inside the box if you insist on a stronger punishment there). But don't destroy a game by destroying one team's ability to win the game. Usually a sending off offence is an individual's offence and not a team's so punish the individual and not the team (the last man red card can be punished as above - with a penalty).

And no, it isn't just because Utd blew it that I argue this - I've been ploughing a lone furrow on this for years But stop and think what would happen to an NFL game if a "personal foul", face mask offence or roughing the passer was punished by reducing the team's offence, defence and special teams to 10 men on the field. Game over!

Edit: yes I do know that codes like rugby and ice hockey have sin-bins but closing down for 10 minutes is not the same as playing the rest of the game with a significant numerical advantage and particularly in soccer where the distribution of players around the pitch (formation) is of such importance and upset by the loss of a player.

[RPI-Fan]

Well, I personally love the penalty system in soccer. I think it only serves to EMPHASIZE the team aspect of the game that one person's actions affect the whole team.

I wouldn't change a thing.

[Big Fo]

That was horrendous, I wouldn't mind if I never saw Evans out there again. He had a good first season but has been mistake prone ever since. Smalling and Jones are younger than him and already better.

Man Utd were eight points behind Chelsea at the same point last season. Today was an awful day, one of the worst I have experienced in 20 odd years of sports fandom, but there's a long way to go yet.

[sovereignstar v2]

Yup. Good day indeed.

[sovereignstar v2]

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by RPI-Fan

Well, I personally love the penalty system in soccer. I think it only serves to EMPHASIZE the team aspect of the game that one person's actions affect the whole team.

I wouldn't change a thing.

You like all the cheating that now takes place as a direct consequence of the card system? You like to see players writhing in agony at the slightest touch or even the proximity of a opposition player's leg in order to get a player carded? It happens because having a player sent off is the greatest advantage a team can have in the game.

"Simulation" is one of the worst aspects of the modern game and it arises directly out of the card system. It even causes players to be punished for doing nothing wrong as simulation is so difficult to detect that refs make errors in the wrong direction - I've seen two players carded this weekend for simulation when replays show that they were in fact tripped. Fortunately they weren't second cards and expulsions from the game and two more games destroyed unnecessarily.

It all makes a mockery of the game.

The sending off has been significantly devalued by the card system. A sending off used to be a punishment of last resort. I played regularly for 15 years and never saw a player sent off. Now it happens in about one game in 5.

You're sent off for tapping the ball away. I saw a striker sent off this weekend when, in frustration at missing an open goal, he kicked at the ball as it came back of the hoarding. Off he went for a second yellow card. Players are sent off for celebrating a goal by raising their shirt or being too enthusiastic. Balotelli got a yellow for merely raising his shirt and revealing a message. A little later, had he tapped a ball away at a throw-in he could have seen red.

Ludicrous!

It's even become a tactic now to engineer the sending off a an opposition player in addition to simulation. On Saturday I saw Harry Kewell take a quick free-kick by hitting the ball directly at a slowly retreating opponent and then demanding a yellow card for the player. Harry knew that that player was on a yellow and would have been sent off for dallying in his retreat.

We constantly see players brandishing an imaginary card for anything remotely over the top.

Goalkeepers no longer dare dive at the feet of an oncoming player because if they get it slightly wrong then they not only concede a penalty - a perfectly reasonable punishment - but he's also likely to be sent off.

Is there any punishment in any sport that compares with the combination of a penalty and a red card for little more than an error in timing? It virtually guarantees the opposition the game.

Evans was sent off for a tackle that was mild in the extreme. Chelsea saw something similar in their game at QPR. There must have been a dozen or more tackles that, as tackles, were far worse than Evans'. He was sent off because he prevented a one-on-one with the keeper. That deserves punishment! But the intelligent punishment would be to dictate a one-on-one with the keeper - a penalty. As the normal one-on-one has a probability of a goal of about 1 in 3 and a penalty about 2 in 3 it's a worthwhile deterrent.

The sending off destroys the game for everyone, players, managers and fans. The game is no longer a competition between equal teams but massively biased to one. It becomes a war of attrition. And often for very little reason.

The punishment should fit the crime. And there are punishments to fit the crimes. The automatic red card is one of the best illustrations of the law-makers tendency to create "unintended consequences" and was, in fact, nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to a high profile "last man" tackle that should have been dealt with more intelligently.

But all this becomes important because of the severity of the punishment. A team reduced to ten men is at a major disadvantage. Utd's error this weekend was that they didn't close down the game when a goal down and a man down as most teams teams would. They went for the Roy of the Rovers option and paid a significant price. It illustrates precisely the disadvantage of the rule - you really have to close it down if the opposition is more than a rabbit.

The first thing to do is to introduce relevant punishments for the "technical" offenses. This will punish teams when an offence advantages the team. This means that the sending off rule comes in only when an individual acts recklessly and endangers an opposition player. Return the punishment to what it traditionally was.

As you're now punishing an individual not a team the punishment should be for the individual and not the team. Therefore instruct the manager to take the player off but allow a substitute. Then punish the player in a tribunal. Put him in the stocks outside of the turnstiles of the next away game

I'm not an expert of the NFL but I've never seen a team reduced to ten men on the field - I assume therefore it doesn't happen - but I've certainly seen reckless play from players. Presumably they're dealt with off the field and a suitable on-field penalty. It seems to work as there is probably less reckless play in the NFL than in the EPL.

Let's stop ruining games. On Sunday I returned to the TV after the halftime break with a new beer and an excitement about the coming second half. Utd a goal down and a battle royal of a game between two very talented teams. A minute later I was close to switching the TV off as the game became hopelessly one-sided. Stop ruining my entertainment !

[flounder]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

Goalkeepers no longer dare dive at the feet of an oncoming player because if they get it slightly wrong then they not only concede a penalty - a perfectly reasonable punishment - but he's also likely to be sent off.

This happened to Derby County earlier this year in the first minute. Ludicrous, but entirely proper according to the rules.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by flounder

This happened to Derby County earlier this year in the first minute. Ludicrous, but entirely proper according to the rules.

Not the best example I've ever seen of a keeper slightly mistiming his dive but the principle is well illustrated. A penalty would have sufficed here but the ref has no choice. In fact this situation doesn't just affect keepers - often these days a mistimed tackle in the box will mean not just a penalty but a red card as well. Really not necessary but brought on by the red card "last man" rule.

I'm not arguing that players shouldn't be appropriately punished but let's not invoke a match-determining punishment for trivial offences such as kicking the ball away or celebrating a little to enthusiastically.

And of course there's the bad decision. I can recall that two red cards have been recinded at the top level this week alone (and for every one recinded there's three or four more that should be). But too late, guys, the damage is done. Had the player been replaced (with appropriate punishment for the offence) then the damage would not be the same and the appropriate adjustment made to the punishment at the disciplinary hearing.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

Not the best example I've ever seen of a keeper slightly mistiming his dive but the principle is well illustrated. A penalty would have sufficed here but the ref has no choice. In fact this situation doesn't just affect keepers - often these days a mistimed tackle in the box will mean not just a penalty but a red card as well. Really not necessary but brought on by the red card "last man" rule.

How on earth would a penalty have sufficed there? The keeper has completely taken him out when he's got a tap in for a goal. So now it's a 50-66% proposition of a goal vs a 100% proposition of a goal. You are going to have players rugby tackling guys in the box when they have a tap in or players just catching the ball on the line (that second one is going to happen on a regular basis) if there's no threat of a red card for a professional foul.

I absolutely agree with you there are way too many red cards given out today and it's become a joke, but I can't agree that you take it out of the game, especially for professional fouls. To do that would make even more of a mockery of the game. It's Jonny Evans fault he's a moron who decided to haul Balotelli down when clear through, it's not the fault of the laws of the game.

Now a suggestion that three yellows now equals a red, I could get behind. I couldn't agree more that there are way too many soft dismissals for yellows and whereas 10 years ago you would only see a second yellow for a pretty bad foul from somebody who was persistent fouling, now they are being handed out like candy. That aspect of the game has just got stupid.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

How on earth would a penalty have sufficed there? The keeper has completely taken him out when he's got a tap in for a goal. So now it's a 50-66% proposition of a goal vs a 100% proposition of a goal. You are going to have players rugby tackling guys in the box when they have a tap in or players just catching the ball on the line (that second one is going to happen on a regular basis) if there's no threat of a red card for a professional foul.

There's some justification in what you say but I think is solved with my suggestion that the professional foul in the box should be punished with a penalty goal. That occurs in rugby - if a ref decides a touchdown would have been scored but for the foul then he awards a "penalty touchdown".

I absolutely agree with you there are way too many red cards given out today and it's become a joke, but I can't agree that you take it out of the game, especially for professional fouls. To do that would make even more of a mockery of the game.

Why is it a mockery of the game to use punishments that are appropriate to the offence? A professional foul denying an attempt on goal is punished with a penalty - a significant attempt on goal. The deterrent comes from the penalty being a 2 in 3 chance of success whereas a one-on-one with the keeper has only a 1 in 3 chance.

It's Jonny Evans fault he's a moron who decided to haul Balotelli down when clear through, it's not the fault of the laws of the game.

As a Utd fan I couldn't agree more with your comment about Evans but it is the fault of the laws of the game that the match was destroyed for fans, players, managers etc when a penalty would have sufficed for punishment.

Now a suggestion that three yellows now equals a red, I could get behind. I couldn't agree more that there are way too many soft dismissals for yellows and whereas 10 years ago you would only see a second yellow for a pretty bad foul from somebody who was persistent fouling, now they are being handed out like candy. That aspect of the game has just got stupid.

But it only becomes stupid when a player is sent off and the game essentially given to the opposing team.

I have no problem with the card system, as I've explained, if it results in a player being REPLACED not dismissed. Then the disciplinary tribunal can hand out the punishment it feels necessary. The card system becomes a way of disciplining players not of determining matches.

Three cards might be an idea before the compulsory replacement or I've heard of an "orange" card that could being introduced. But if you have a replacement system then neither are probably not necessary.

The idea is that the cards are then accumulated at the tribunal to determine the level of punishment. This would also allow corrections for wrong calls to be made where necessary and no real damage will have been done.

To prevent unscrupulous managers from playing a "dirty" game you could restrict the replacement to say 2 players and if a club accumulates an inordinate number of cards then punish the club.

I don't understand why you believe that the absence of the sending off option will cause a riot of professional fouls? Does it do so in the NFL? Not that I'm aware of, nor any other sport. They all succeed in maintaining disciplinary control without it - including soccer before the early 80s when a sending off was a last resort and very rare occasion and not the general means of control that it's become.

Last night on ESPN a commentator said (though not intended in this context but as a statement of fact):

"Many games these days are decided by a sending off".

I would add the word "too" as in "Too many games these days ..........."

This weekend the bookies had Chelsea, Man Utd and Aston Villa all favourites to win their games. All lost a player (Chelsea 2). All lost the match!

The cards were significant causes in the results. So, considering how variable referees are in deciding between fouls, yellow and red cards we really don't want matches determined by cards - ie referee's (sometimes mind-bogglingly ) unpredictable judgements.

[sovereignstar v2]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Gunners get a W (after giving up yet another set piece goal). Up to 7th in the table now. The scary, scary part is relying so heavily on glass man. If he stays healthy, things could be good and they could challenge for that CL spot. He gets hurt, there aren't a lot of other options now.

I don't like to get caught up in transfer rumors (as City is linked to every fricking player to the world at this point), but the biggest City "In The Know" that called all of City's summer signings correctly has said that RVP to City is nailed on for January recently.