Aaron Ramsey

[Gooner Girl]

To be fair, it'd been about half an hour since it happened and his side had just won the game in dramatic fashion - I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

I don't think it was malicious, and neither was Gallas on Davies.

He got that benefit of the doubt first time rouund for me, then he saw what his heat of the moment speech did, Martin Taylor even getting death threats. The situation is going to escalate again, because of his comments, and he should have learnt.

He didn't say anything as inflammatory as wanting Shawcross banned for life or anything like that, just that he was disapointed in the tackle.

If you whisk managers straight from the touchline to the TV cameras you're not going to get a level headed opinion. As far as hypocrisy goes, no-one was castigating Coyle after he likened Gallas mistimed (but obviously a foul) challenge on Davies to an assault (which he also later retracted). It's an emotional game.

no - what he is saying is what he has said before - that is is a deliberate tactic against arsenal - a conspiracy to maim his players. what else does he mean when he says it isn't a coincidence other than it is deliberate?

Exactly, reads to me like he is clearly implying Shawcross did it on purpose.

I don't think Shawcross did it on purpose but Wenger is right when he says we have a higher number of these awful tackles against us then most other clubs so why is that?

I think its just a result of the football we play. Teams can rarely outpass us so find other ways to stop us. Generally that is being more physical and if its within the rules and a tactic that works then who can blame them but it does mean accidents like this are more likely to happen.

[Prufrock]

..... which is different to Coyle saying Gallas assaulted Mark Davies in what way?

I'm not saying I agree with Wenger, I don't, but I can understand him being upset.

Coyle was wrong to say that, but the situations are completely different. The fact Davies wasn't seriously hurt meant there was nowhere near as much press attention. The fact this is happening to Arsenal again, mean so much press speculation is going to be around this. He saw his comments last time brought death threats and genuine fears for Martin Taylor's safety. I gave him the benefit of the doubt that time, but he has seen the effect his comments can have on the situation, and should know better after last time.

[Prufrock]

He got that benefit of the doubt first time rouund for me, then he saw what his heat of the moment speech did, Martin Taylor even getting death threats. The situation is going to escalate again, because of his comments, and he should have learnt.

He didn't say anything as inflammatory as wanting Shawcross banned for life or anything like that, just that he was disapointed in the tackle.

If you whisk managers straight from the touchline to the TV cameras you're not going to get a level headed opinion. As far as hypocrisy goes, no-one was castigating Coyle after he likened Gallas mistimed (but obviously a foul) challenge on Davies to an assault (which he also later retracted). It's an emotional game.

no - what he is saying is what he has said before - that is is a deliberate tactic against arsenal - a conspiracy to maim his players. what else does he mean when he says it isn't a coincidence other than it is deliberate?

Exactly, reads to me like he is clearly implying Shawcross did it on purpose.

I don't think Shawcross did it on purpose but Wenger is right when he says we have a higher number of these awful tackles against us then most other clubs so why is that?

I think its just a result of the football we play. Teams can rarely outpass us so find other ways to stop us. Generally that is being more physical and if its within the rules and a tactic that works then who can blame them but it does mean accidents like this are more likely to happen.

I disagree. These tackles don't happen more often to you, you just happen to have been unfortunate that the ones that have have resulted in serious injuries. As evidenced when Gallas made that tackle on Davies, there are instances of these things happening both to and against you. I refuse to believe that in 99% of cases players are anything other than honest in these kind of tackles. Even if there are more against you, the reasons are only your players are too quick for honest, but mistimed tackles. Short of outlawing tackling we have to accept these things are unfortunate, but inevitable parts of a contact sport.

[Gooner Girl]

..... which is different to Coyle saying Gallas assaulted Mark Davies in what way?

I'm not saying I agree with Wenger, I don't, but I can understand him being upset.

Coyle was wrong to say that, but the situations are completely different. The fact Davies wasn't seriously hurt meant there was nowhere near as much press attention. The fact this is happening to Arsenal again, mean so much press speculation is going to be around this. He saw his comments last time brought death threats and genuine fears for Martin Taylor's safety. I gave him the benefit of the doubt that time, but he has seen the effect his comments can have on the situation, and should know better after last time.

I don't see whats so out of order about his comments this time?

"I am not very happy with the tackle. We know what to expect from other teams but we have now lost three players in five years to horrendous tackles. I refuse to believe it's coincidence when you're hit as many times as we are. We know teams want to be physical against Arsenal - this is the result. When you see how Aaron got injured today in the way that he did, it is not acceptable. I don't accept that"

Too right, he's not happy with the tackle and its not acceptable. I don't think he is accusing Shawcross of doing it deliberatly when he says it's not a coincidence cos he goes on to say that the reason its not a coincidence is cos teams are physical against Arsenal. When you play physically then even if its within the letter of the law you are always going to have accidents like this one.

I know Wenger is the manager all Bolton fans seem to love to hate and granted he does say some idiot things at time but i see nothing out of order in his comments this time. This is the 2nd player he has lost to a horrendous injury in just a few seasons and straight after the match its hardly surprising he's hacked off and angry about it. Look at the uproar you lot sent up over the Gallas on Davies challenge and he was back playing within a week or so. Ramsey won't be.

[thebish]

..... which is different to Coyle saying Gallas assaulted Mark Davies in what way?

I'm not saying I agree with Wenger, I don't, but I can understand him being upset.

we can all understand him being upset - that's not at issue.

he could just as easily have said "it looks very bad and we are gutted for the lad" that would have expressed his upset

he did NOT need to imply - as he has - that there is a deliberate agenda amongst other teams/players to maim his players.

Coyle was wrong too - and given Wenger was also quick to say Coyle was wrong - hardly adds any further excuse for Wenger to repeat his insidious and plainly wrong allegations.

[Prufrock]

But he has done it before, and was wrong then. If he isn't accusing him of doing it deliberately, how is Shawcross supposed to avoid it? Not tackle, that is the only way. It's a contact sport, and yet again, an unfortunate injury is being used to push the poor old Arsenal theme. What does it is not acceptable mean? It is a contact sport. It's an awful thing to happen but it's just unfortunate. Nothing more. Wenger has a responsiblity to make sure he doesn't fan the flames again. As I said, I gave him the benefit of the doubt that time. Clearly it's a traumatic situation, but it's dissapointing yet again he cannot control his comments.

[Gooner Girl]

He didn't say anything as inflammatory as wanting Shawcross banned for life or anything like that, just that he was disapointed in the tackle.

If you whisk managers straight from the touchline to the TV cameras you're not going to get a level headed opinion. As far as hypocrisy goes, no-one was castigating Coyle after he likened Gallas mistimed (but obviously a foul) challenge on Davies to an assault (which he also later retracted). It's an emotional game.

no - what he is saying is what he has said before - that is is a deliberate tactic against arsenal - a conspiracy to maim his players. what else does he mean when he says it isn't a coincidence other than it is deliberate?

Exactly, reads to me like he is clearly implying Shawcross did it on purpose.

I don't think Shawcross did it on purpose but Wenger is right when he says we have a higher number of these awful tackles against us then most other clubs so why is that?

I think its just a result of the football we play. Teams can rarely outpass us so find other ways to stop us. Generally that is being more physical and if its within the rules and a tactic that works then who can blame them but it does mean accidents like this are more likely to happen.

I disagree. These tackles don't happen more often to you, you just happen to have been unfortunate that the ones that have have resulted in serious injuries. As evidenced when Gallas made that tackle on Davies, there are instances of these things happening both to and against you. I refuse to believe that in 99% of cases players are anything other than honest in these kind of tackles. Even if there are more against you, the reasons are only your players are too quick for honest, but mistimed tackles. Short of outlawing tackling we have to accept these things are unfortunate, but inevitable parts of a contact sport.

I didn't say that players weren't honest against us in the tackles, if you read what i said i said it was an accident and not on purpose and i also said the reason they seem to happen more against us is because of the football we play to which you agree saying our players are too quick (is it a law to be not allowed to be TOO quick?) I am at a loss as to what you are disagreeing with me about?! I think i pretty much said that maybe we have to accept bad tackles if we play the way we do, nowehere did i say players shouldn't tackle us i said that who can blame them for using those sort of tactics when clearly they work.

[Prufrock]

no - what he is saying is what he has said before - that is is a deliberate tactic against arsenal - a conspiracy to maim his players. what else does he mean when he says it isn't a coincidence other than it is deliberate?

Exactly, reads to me like he is clearly implying Shawcross did it on purpose.

I don't think Shawcross did it on purpose but Wenger is right when he says we have a higher number of these awful tackles against us then most other clubs so why is that?

I think its just a result of the football we play. Teams can rarely outpass us so find other ways to stop us. Generally that is being more physical and if its within the rules and a tactic that works then who can blame them but it does mean accidents like this are more likely to happen.

I disagree. These tackles don't happen more often to you, you just happen to have been unfortunate that the ones that have have resulted in serious injuries. As evidenced when Gallas made that tackle on Davies, there are instances of these things happening both to and against you. I refuse to believe that in 99% of cases players are anything other than honest in these kind of tackles. Even if there are more against you, the reasons are only your players are too quick for honest, but mistimed tackles. Short of outlawing tackling we have to accept these things are unfortunate, but inevitable parts of a contact sport.

I didn't say that players weren't honest against us in the tackles, if you read what i said i said it was an accident and not on purpose and i also said the reason they seem to happen more against us is because of the football we play to which you agree saying our players are too quick (is it a law to be not allowed to be TOO quick?) I am at a loss as to what you are disagreeing with me about?! I think i pretty much said that maybe we have to accept bad tackles if we play the way we do, nowehere did i say players shouldn't tackle us i said that who can blame them for using those sort of tactics when clearly they work.

Fair enough as to what you yourself are saying, my issue is with Wenger who clearly doesn't share that view. Those quotes imply teams go out to deliberately hurt Arsenal. That is not true, and it isn't the first time he's said such things.

[thebish]

I didn't say that players weren't honest against us in the tackles, if you read what i said i said it was an accident and not on purpose and i also said the reason they seem to happen more against us is because of the football we play to which you agree saying our players are too quick (is it a law to be not allowed to be TOO quick?) I am at a loss as to what you are disagreeing with me about?! I think i pretty much said that maybe we have to accept bad tackles if we play the way we do, nowehere did i say players shouldn't tackle us i said that who can blame them for using those sort of tactics when clearly they work.

so if wenger is not suggesting anything deliberate then what does he mean by:

When you see how Aaron got injured today in the way that he did, it is not acceptable. I don't accept that

what exactly doesn't he accept - what is not acceptable specifically?

[Gooner Girl]

He said teams go out and deliberately play physically against us which IS true - they do, cos they know thats the best chance they have of beating us. If that physicality is within the rules then fine, who can blame them.

I haven't seen the tackle so i don't know if it was 50/50 or a really bad challenge, if it was a really bad challenge then even if it was not deliberate its still not within the rules of the game in which case the ref was right to send Shawcross off and Wenger is justified to be hacked off.

[KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab]

Snakes on a plane.

Something this board has never seen.

An Arsenal fan with an acceptance that tackling is part of the game. Looks like Hell can practice for the two-man bob at the next Olympics after all.

Had it been the other way round, the poor lad on the stretcher would have been goaded and abused. Yet the first reaction I hear from an Arsenal fan is, unfortunately, 606. Knew I should have turned it off when I heard that awful Irish screech of Baron Silas Greenback. Suspend managers whose players injure others? Arsene would be as guilty as everyone else. Shawcross is always doing this? McCleish TOLD Martin Taylor to break Eduardo's legs?

Then, as the piece de resistance, he challenged Baron Greenback to name one player who had his leg broken by an Arsenal player under Wenger. What injury did Campo have? Or Steinsson?

I shouldn't use 606 as a yardstick for the behaviour of certain clubs' fans, but Arsenal have a lot of previous for this.

Can't see the tackle on the link Pru sent, but it sounded from the commentary like Ramsey got injured because he pulled out of the challenge. And the number of times you see players injured because they don't committ themselves in the tackle is unbelievable.

[Gooner Girl]

I didn't say that players weren't honest against us in the tackles, if you read what i said i said it was an accident and not on purpose and i also said the reason they seem to happen more against us is because of the football we play to which you agree saying our players are too quick (is it a law to be not allowed to be TOO quick?) I am at a loss as to what you are disagreeing with me about?! I think i pretty much said that maybe we have to accept bad tackles if we play the way we do, nowehere did i say players shouldn't tackle us i said that who can blame them for using those sort of tactics when clearly they work.

so if wenger is not suggesting anything deliberate then what does he mean by:

When you see how Aaron got injured today in the way that he did, it is not acceptable. I don't accept that

what exactly doesn't he accept - what is not acceptable specifically?

The fact that a player can make a tackle that is OUTSIDE the rules of the game? I haven't seen it but the player got sent off so presumably the referee thought it wasn't acceptable or within the rules of the game either? So if he thought it wasn't and sent the player off whys it so outrageous for wenger to feel the same?

[Gooner Girl]

Snakes on a plane.

Something this board has never seen.

An Arsenal fan with an acceptance that tackling is part of the game. Looks like Hell can practice for the two-man bob at the next Olympics after all.

I'm old enough to remember Arsenal under George Graham and the back 5 of Dixon, Adams, Keown, Bould and Winterburn - after watching them how could i not accept tackling as part of a game?!

[thebish]

I didn't say that players weren't honest against us in the tackles, if you read what i said i said it was an accident and not on purpose and i also said the reason they seem to happen more against us is because of the football we play to which you agree saying our players are too quick (is it a law to be not allowed to be TOO quick?) I am at a loss as to what you are disagreeing with me about?! I think i pretty much said that maybe we have to accept bad tackles if we play the way we do, nowehere did i say players shouldn't tackle us i said that who can blame them for using those sort of tactics when clearly they work.

so if wenger is not suggesting anything deliberate then what does he mean by:

When you see how Aaron got injured today in the way that he did, it is not acceptable. I don't accept that

what exactly doesn't he accept - what is not acceptable specifically?

The fact that a player can make a tackle that is OUTSIDE the rules of the game? I haven't seen it but the player got sent off so presumably the referee thought it wasn't acceptable or within the rules of the game either? So if he thought it wasn't and sent the player off whys it so outrageous for wenger to feel the same?

ok - come back and tell us what you think when you've seen it then.

[Gooner Girl]

I didn't say that players weren't honest against us in the tackles, if you read what i said i said it was an accident and not on purpose and i also said the reason they seem to happen more against us is because of the football we play to which you agree saying our players are too quick (is it a law to be not allowed to be TOO quick?) I am at a loss as to what you are disagreeing with me about?! I think i pretty much said that maybe we have to accept bad tackles if we play the way we do, nowehere did i say players shouldn't tackle us i said that who can blame them for using those sort of tactics when clearly they work.

so if wenger is not suggesting anything deliberate then what does he mean by:

When you see how Aaron got injured today in the way that he did, it is not acceptable. I don't accept that

what exactly doesn't he accept - what is not acceptable specifically?

The fact that a player can make a tackle that is OUTSIDE the rules of the game? I haven't seen it but the player got sent off so presumably the referee thought it wasn't acceptable or within the rules of the game either? So if he thought it wasn't and sent the player off whys it so outrageous for wenger to feel the same?

ok - come back and tell us what you think when you've seen it then.

I will and even if it was 50/50 given that i doubt Wenger had seen any replay when asked about it and all the evidence he had was a nastily broken leg and the ref sending the player off i still won't say he was out of order!

[thebish]

I will and even if it was 50/50 given that i doubt Wenger had seen any replay when asked about it and all the evidence he had was a nastily broken leg and the ref sending the player off i still won't say he was out of order!

I never imagined you would.

what YOU have said is fair enough - and (if you don't mind me saying so) - untypical of the average Gooner you might hear spouting off... it is not what YOU think that folk are p'd off about - but what Wenger says...

did you hear the first arsenal caller on 606 - that me and KB refer to??? I guess not....

[Prufrock]

Snakes on a plane.

Something this board has never seen.

An Arsenal fan with an acceptance that tackling is part of the game. Looks like Hell can practice for the two-man bob at the next Olympics after all.

Had it been the other way round, the poor lad on the stretcher would have been goaded and abused. Yet the first reaction I hear from an Arsenal fan is, unfortunately, 606. Knew I should have turned it off when I heard that awful Irish screech of Baron Silas Greenback. Suspend managers whose players injure others? Arsene would be as guilty as everyone else. Shawcross is always doing this? McCleish TOLD Martin Taylor to break Eduardo's legs?

Then, as the piece de resistance, he challenged Baron Greenback to name one player who had his leg broken by an Arsenal player under Wenger. What injury did Campo have? Or Steinsson?

I shouldn't use 606 as a yardstick for the behaviour of certain clubs' fans, but Arsenal have a lot of previous for this.

Can't see the tackle on the link Pru sent, but it sounded from the commentary like Ramsey got injured because he pulled out of the challenge. And the number of times you see players injured because they don't committ themselves in the tackle is unbelievable.

The link only has it at full speed from a fair distance. It looks like one of those 50/50s where both players go to ground and Ramsey just gets there first. From that view it certainly looks like a foul, but I've even heard said it shouldn't have been a red card. Can't tell without a replay but there is no way Shawcross has gone in to hurt him.

[Gooner Girl]

I will and even if it was 50/50 given that i doubt Wenger had seen any replay when asked about it and all the evidence he had was a nastily broken leg and the ref sending the player off i still won't say he was out of order!

I never imagined you would.

what YOU have said is fair enough - and (if you don't mind me saying so) - untypical of the average Gooner you might hear spouting off... it is not what YOU think that folk are p'd off about - but what Wenger says...

did you hear the first arsenal caller on 606 - that me and KB refer to??? I guess not....

Now c'mon Bish, i do admit that Wenger is talking twaddle sometimes, you know that, i'm not totally blind to his faults but i just don't think he has said anything outrageous this time.

No, i didn't hear the first Arsenal caller on 606 - no doubt he was being an idiot but that doesn't mean you can tar us all with the same brush and call us all utter wankers. I am sure there are some good Bolton fans around and some idiot ones too - same as in any club (in fact, some might say all bolton fans have to have a screw loose somewhere...)

[Prufrock]

I didn't say that players weren't honest against us in the tackles, if you read what i said i said it was an accident and not on purpose and i also said the reason they seem to happen more against us is because of the football we play to which you agree saying our players are too quick (is it a law to be not allowed to be TOO quick?) I am at a loss as to what you are disagreeing with me about?! I think i pretty much said that maybe we have to accept bad tackles if we play the way we do, nowehere did i say players shouldn't tackle us i said that who can blame them for using those sort of tactics when clearly they work.

so if wenger is not suggesting anything deliberate then what does he mean by:

When you see how Aaron got injured today in the way that he did, it is not acceptable. I don't accept that

what exactly doesn't he accept - what is not acceptable specifically?

The fact that a player can make a tackle that is OUTSIDE the rules of the game? I haven't seen it but the player got sent off so presumably the referee thought it wasn't acceptable or within the rules of the game either? So if he thought it wasn't and sent the player off whys it so outrageous for wenger to feel the same?

You honestly believe Wenger is only implying that he thought it was a foul? It's not even as if it's the case the hardest tackles = the worst injuries, far from it, as KB alluded to. Wenger's tone seems to me, and to others, to imply Shawcross, and others, set out to hurt Arsenal players. If you disagree on that inferral, fair enough, but it seems fairly clear to me.

[KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab]

no doubt he was being an idiot but that doesn't mean you can tar us all with the same brush and call us all utter wankers.

No. Just 90% of those with a voice. Or a keyboard. Or a phone.

(I'd love to add a smiley here. Sad fact is, I don't feel I can)