Michael Tucker

Manchester United 2 Chelsea 0

399 posts in this topic

53 minutes ago, Michael Tucker said:

17 fouls to 7, and then 14 fouls to 7, + I player sent off, is a clear and obvious tactic - and shows exactly what United attempted to get away with. The 'none of our players were injured' line doesn't change that.  I watched both games, and saw exactly what happened - and that's all the 'proof' I need. - they may not normally be 'a kicking side' (I'll take your word for that, as I don't normally watch them), but they certainly were in both games against Chelsea this season.

Then of course you need to add in the myriad of tackles that the referee didn't deem as fouls , normally between 40 and 700 per game depending on which boss eyed incompetent the cretin in charge at the PGMOL selects and whether it's Spurs we're playing..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Droy was my hero said:

 In winning the ball they did commit some fouls, but the intent to go for ball not man was clear.

MT you like to find the facts that support your argument.  Well none of our players were injured.

 

Deja vu all over again with you Droy. Just leaving this here.  I don't want a debate that lasts for weeks as I have other things to do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Tucker said:

17 fouls to 7, and then 14 fouls to 7, + I player sent off, is a clear and obvious tactic - and shows exactly what United attempted to get away with. The 'none of our players were injured' line doesn't change that.  I watched both games, and saw exactly what happened - and that's all the 'proof' I need. - they may not normally be 'a kicking side' (I'll take your word for that, as I don't normally watch them), but they certainly were in both games against Chelsea this season.

I suggest you you watch the Stoke game again before you get carried away with your own prejudices.  Spurs and City are the big clubs with real form in this.

8 minutes ago, Ham said:

Deja vu all over again with you Droy. Just leaving this here.  I don't want a debate that lasts for weeks as I have other things to do. 

I think you backed out last time too.  The stamp was just bad temper out of frustration.  He pulls out of it rather than follows through.  And stamps are not known for injuring players, are they.  

There is no evidence that Man U came to kick us out of the game.  But hey, when it comes to Mourinho who cares about evidence.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

 

I think you backed out last time too.  The stamp was just bad temper out of frustration.  He pulls out of it rather than follows through.  And stamps are not known for injuring players, are they.  

There is no evidence that Man U came to kick us out of the game.  But hey, when it comes to Mourinho who cares about evidence.  

Backed out?  I presented video evidence showing an act of violence. I didn't need to do any more.

By ignoring the video evidence it's you that backs out each time. 

I've never known a non Man Utd fan in such a hurry to excuse/support them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Ham said:

Backed out?  I presented video evidence showing an act of violence. I didn't need to do any more.

By ignoring the video evidence it's you that backs out each time. 

I've never known a non Man Utd fan in such a hurry to excuse/support them. 

A late stamp is evidence of a team that has been given the run around, not a team that set out to kicks the other team out of the game - no matter how preset your opinion remains. 

I'm not excusing Man U for anything. I just think you do a great favour to Stoke, City and Spurs if you pick that game as an example of violence. 

It was a close game, Man U played well.  Especially H1.  No shame in admitting that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading redcafe a few weeks ago and one of them was asking "Are we a dirty team?". Interesting, from United fans. The evidence cited was numbers of fouls committed. Ignoring the usual tin helmet stuff, some suggest that they are more a team with some dirty players than dirty per se. They cite Rojo, Herriera, Fellaini. However, at that time, the most fouling players were Pogba with 54, Zlatan with 50, Herera with 37, Valencia with 29, Fellaini with 23. Rojo's next with 17. I don't think numbers of fouls tell you very much. Its more about the nature of the foul and the intent behind it.

I think, in the above video, Rojo intends to stamp on Hazard with the purpose of intimidating him and without a care that it might damage him. He should have been punished and was lucky. However, the thing I hate is the organised targetting of players by a whole team. It not only indicates intent but also an attempt to avoid punishment. However, it's not new, it has been going on for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The Costa situation does worry me a lot.  When even his die hard supporters are praising him for "keeping shape" and "occupying defenders" you know we've got a serious problem. The last Chelsea player that used to keep shape didn't start a PL game for Conte before being sold. So I struggle to understand why Conte still  starts Costa let alone play him 90 min. 

Edited by Blue Rod
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/04/2017 at 2:56 PM, Blue_In_Every_Way said:

Agree to disagree then. Other than the Hazard chance which he created all by himself I am struggling to recall another opportunity we fashioned. 

To not acknowledge the huge impact the sending off had on their game plan, IMO, would be very unfair to them. 

Yeah but the sending off was a direct failure of their game plan and was completely their fault..........................

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chelsea-Till-I-Die said:

Yeah but the sending off was a direct failure of their game plan and was completely their fault..........................

 

No.  The Red was unfortunate and unfair on the player.  5 or so yellows might have been fair, while making the game a lot closer. 

Again compare the big Spurs game last season.   No reds, just one yellow each. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Blue Rod said:

The Costa situation does worry me a lot.  When even his die hard supporters are praising him for "keeping shape" and "occupying defenders" you know we've got a serious problem. The last Chelsea player that used to keep shape didn't start a PL game for Conte before being sold. So I struggle to understand why Conte still  starts Costa let alone play him 90 min. 

My guess is that it's because Costa does some of the other things needed better than what anyone could possibly do. Problem for me is, he's not doing that so much either. Beyond his willingness to work and close down, the rest of his game as drastically dropped off. I'd really love to see Bats get a few games in the trot, although with the way the season is balanced currently Costa, lack of form aside, is the more trusted option with his experience as a lone CF.  

What has also likely to have impacted the situation was Conte's original plan of 424 not panning out. In that system it would have allowed Costa and Bats to play together, which is probably where the latter fits better - as part of a two, than a one upfront. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.