Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

BS3_RED

Set the pigs out for the return match / Cheats / Fracas on touchline (Merged)

Recommended Posts

Really enjoyed reading some of this thread...  its got the lot, fact, fiction, bias, agreement, argument, and a whole lot of humour (intentional or otherwise) nicely capped off with a handbag and a cockwomble to boot. Love it. :clapping:

 

 

 

*( PS .. great material for any am/dram theatre producer, scriptwriter to turn it into a very entertaining adult pantomime... :) ... I'd pay to see that even if it meant visiting the bloody Tobacco Factory.. )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/09/2017 at 11:46, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Football used to be mans game, last night your once proud club were like a load of flouncing prima donnas, who bitched about every single decision all night. The price you pay for a predominantly foreign squad with a foreign manager.

In fact at half time Hugh Mclmoyle was introduced to the crowd, a man who played for both clubs in his time, apart from the huge wages these ballerinas earn now I suspect that he was pissing himself at the the theatrics of your team.

We have a tradition on this forum where honest supporters of our rivals will in general be treated with respect, but you have to talk sense and you are not, your team ignored the unwritten laws of fair play and your argument about playing us off of the park is just bullshit.

You had 7.2% more possession, big ******* deal you were the home team who have spent millions.

You did have 9 more shots in total than us, but strangely only 2 more on target.

You had one more corner than us.

You committed more fouls than us, so well done for that.

But the most damning stat is that you had 7 clear cut chances and only managed to put 3 of them away, so perhaps your bitching should be aimed at your misfiring strikers.

It is a strange phenomena that fans of teams with a 'glorious history' albeit many years ago have an incredible sense of entitlement.

Good luck for the rest of the season, perhaps the penny will drop when several more teams fans point out the less attractive side of Wolves game plans.

 

Like I said I'm not really a stats person. I was there and I watched it and form my opinion on what I witnessed. I gave credit to Bristol for coming to play. It made for an entertaining game for which for me was ruined by the ref. I don't even have many complaints about the penalty. I personally think it was to close to be a handball but have seen them given and understand that decision but the challenge in batth was a clattering. He may have one the header but he did so by leading with his arm and clattering him. I didn't call for a red but anywhere else on the pitch and it's a foul. I think wolves played the better football and created a lot of chances. You may be right about misfiring striker but that doesn't change the fact that wolves were the better team. You will obviously defend your team the way I will defend mine. We will see what happens at your place and speak again. 

Share this post


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

Nice mature response. It doesn't matter who scored the late equaliser. Wolves dominated the game and Bristol city did pinch a point. It's just a phrase for when the dominant team is held to a draw. 'cockwomble' new one to me. It must be a Welsh thing 

Diolch cariad. Mochyn du!

Share this post


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

Nice mature response. It doesn't matter who scored the late equaliser. Wolves dominated the game and Bristol city did pinch a point. It's just a phrase for when the dominant team is held to a draw. 'cockwomble' new one to me. It must be a Welsh thing 

Dear oh dear........Regardless of how the game played out , after 82 minutes, we were going home with 3 points, end of. Therefore, you equalising in the 85th minute deems that it is you that snatched a draw/pinched a point and no amount of emotional or creative explanation on your part is going to change that. As for being dominated, go to the Brentford v Bristol City match stats from earlier in the season if you want to see us pinch a point from a dominant team. 

The facts from Tuesday saw 54 v 46 Possession,  5 v 4 shots on target,  9 v 8 corners, saves 1 v 2 which does not suggest "dominated". The only area you excelled was in off-target chances 11 v 4 which in most sensible people's eyes makes you 'wasteful' not 'dominant'........fancy paying all that money for players that end up hitting row z most times :yawn:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wolvesaywe said:

Like I said I'm not really a stats person. I was there and I watched it and form my opinion on what I witnessed. I gave credit to Bristol for coming to play. It made for an entertaining game for which for me was ruined by the ref. I don't even have many complaints about the penalty. I personally think it was to close to be a handball but have seen them given and understand that decision but the challenge in batth was a clattering. He may have one the header but he did so by leading with his arm and clattering him. I didn't call for a red but anywhere else on the pitch and it's a foul. I think wolves played the better football and created a lot of chances. You may be right about misfiring striker but that doesn't change the fact that wolves were the better team. You will obviously defend your team the way I will defend mine. We will see what happens at your place and speak again. 

Cease the nonsense on the Wright / Ba'ath challenge pal. From where I was, Wright was in position, ready to leap and clear the ball. Ba'ath was a few yards away and came steaming over and basically jumped into Wright at 100 mile an hour. It was a ridiculous and cynical challenge by Ba'ath and he ought to have been booked for it. 

The same player, Ba'ath, was the one who went down in his own box holding his head, which prevented us from swinging a cross in. Ref stopped play, Ba'ath duly gets up limping! Funny kinda head injury that gives you a limp, don't you think? 

Your player's decision to subsequently not pass the ball back to us, after we'd been in an attacking position, was simply shocking and poor sportsmanship of the highest order. Quite despicable really. 

Were you the better team? Yes, without a doubt. But that's football. No need for your players to conduct themselves in an unsportsmanlike manner and no need for your fans to bleat on about a challenge in which your player deserved a booking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

Diolch cariad. Mochyn du!

One way of getting around the swear filter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Wolvesaywe said:

Nice mature response. It doesn't matter who scored the late equaliser. Wolves dominated the game and Bristol city did pinch a point. It's just a phrase for when the dominant team is held to a draw. 'cockwomble' new one to me. It must be a Welsh thing 

Not welsh,deepest darkest Somerset,go there at your peril.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2017 at 16:14, Olé said:

Does anyone know what the connection is between Lee Johnson and Nuno? Despite the incident they were all hugging at full time and Nuno refers to knowing Lee Johnson from a long time ago. Did they do coaching badges together?

I also wondered this... was answered in the pre-Derby press conference (audio on the website). They did their UEFA A licence together in Scotland. Also said a coaching session he laid on during that course was identical to how Wolves played on Tuesday night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Wolvesaywe said:

Like I said I'm not really a stats person. I was there and I watched it and form my opinion on what I witnessed. I gave credit to Bristol for coming to play. It made for an entertaining game for which for me was ruined by the ref. I don't even have many complaints about the penalty. I personally think it was to close to be a handball but have seen them given and understand that decision but the challenge in batth was a clattering. He may have one the header but he did so by leading with his arm and clattering him. I didn't call for a red but anywhere else on the pitch and it's a foul. I think wolves played the better football and created a lot of chances. You may be right about misfiring striker but that doesn't change the fact that wolves were the better team. You will obviously defend your team the way I will defend mine. We will see what happens at your place and speak again. 

Mate the foul was committed by Batth any other interpretation is just plain stupid.

I cannot see any post by anybody claiming anything other than Wolves were the better team, however once more your claim that Wolves dominated the game is not backed up by the evidence and again is just plain stupid.

And as for the piss poor sportsmanship regarding 2 drop balls, I cannot wait to see the indignation from the 'entitled' Wolves fans when it happens against you.

But hey there is defending your team and there is defending the indefensible, for what it's worth I believe as the season progresses Wolves will gain a reputation for this sort of  behaviour, just like our dear friends at Swindon under Mark Cooper did.

As I say maybe when even you spot this pattern the penny might drop, but I won't hold my breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2017 at 19:28, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Racist my arse.

So what else would you call the assumption that people are cheats because they're foreigners?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, richwwtk said:

So what else would you call the assumption that people are cheats because they're foreigners?

An assumption backed up by a research/study conducted by Dr Thomas Webb of Portsmouth university, but i'm sure he is a racist as well?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

An assumption backed up by a research/study conducted by Dr Thomas Webb of Portsmouth university, but i'm sure he is a racist as well?.

His research was only looking into diving, and states that perceptions are that diving is on the increase in the premier league because of the increase in foreign players coming from leagues where diving is tolerated more than in this country. It does also not relate to the number of foreigners diving, just that the increase in foreign players has led to the increase in diving. the English players are doing it just as much now.

It does not say that people cheat because they are foreign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, richwwtk said:

His research was only looking into diving, and states that perceptions are that diving is on the increase in the premier league because of the increase in foreign players coming from leagues where diving is tolerated more than in this country. It does also not relate to the number of foreigners diving, just that the increase in foreign players has led to the increase in diving. the English players are doing it just as much now.

It does not say that people cheat because they are foreign.

Nice spin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, richwwtk said:

So what else would you call the assumption that people are cheats because they're foreigners?

Come on, its not racist, xenophobic at worst. If he would have said "all black players are cheats" then you can call it racist.

The reality is, most Latin/South American countries are quite open about the fact that the darker arts are very much part of their game so naturally if a player from those leagues comes to the UK, he will probably carry on doing it (think Suarez). That could also be said about some players from European Leagues, notably Italian/Spanish leagues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RedRaw said:

Come on, its not racist, xenophobic at worst. If he would have said "all black players are cheats" then you can call it racist.

The reality is, most Latin/South American countries are quite open about the fact that the darker arts are very much part of their game so naturally if a player from those leagues comes to the UK, he will probably carry on doing it (think Suarez). That could also be said about some players from European Leagues, notably Italian/Spanish leagues

Of course I have not actually been pointed to where I actually said what I am being accused of.

The full quote and context is this, perhaps the insert of IMO might have helped and the evidence was that they flounced around like prima donnas and bitched about every decision, they were managed by a foreign coach and their team/squad was predominantly foreign.

"Football used to be mans game, last night your once proud club were like a load of flouncing prima donnas, who bitched about every single decision all night. The price you pay for a predominantly foreign squad with a foreign manager".

Racism is what Diane Abbott suffered during the last election but sadly our mainly white middle class PC brigade like to see it where it doesn't exist.

Share this post


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

His research was only looking into diving, and states that perceptions are that diving is on the increase in the premier league because of the increase in foreign players coming from leagues where diving is tolerated more than in this country. It does also not relate to the number of foreigners diving, just that the increase in foreign players has led to the increase in diving. the English players are doing it just as much now.

It does not say that people cheat because they are foreign.

Lighten up and watch a La Liga game ffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RedRaw said:

Come on, its not racist, xenophobic at worst. If he would have said "all black players are cheats" then you can call it racist.

The reality is, most Latin/South American countries are quite open about the fact that the darker arts are very much part of their game so naturally if a player from those leagues comes to the UK, he will probably carry on doing it (think Suarez). That could also be said about some players from European Leagues, notably Italian/Spanish leagues

Weighing in late here, but I read a fascinating debate about this many years ago from a Portuguese perspective, which basically said that the style of football in Southern Europe and South America favoured ball playing skilful footballers moving at speed, whereas the style of football in Northern Europe favoured physical strong combative footballers trained to go in hard and disrupt. It argued that diving was not cheating but a response to the alternative style of football: if I'm going to try and play football and you're just going to kick me up in the air, then I'm going to try and deter you from doing that the only way I can.

I doubt that many will agree, but I do think it raises a point which gets conveniently avoided whenever this subject is raised. The word cheat is immediately used when diving is involved, but the word cheat is never used for limited footballers who go in hard without winning the ball. Foul, certainly. Dangerous, perhaps. Cheat - never. You are more likely to hear "that's a heavy tackle". Yet it's someone who is unable to compete on footballing terms so resorts to breaching the laws of the game to gain an advantage. Why is it any different? But we use language like "darker arts" only to refer to how others gain an advantage.

It's amazing double standards.

Personally I see a difference between those who feign contact when tackled running at speed (a universal trait - see: Gerrard - and for some people a defensible reaction based on the argument above) and those who feign contact to the face, or collapse at set pieces, or do anything else which has no precedent from any passage of play  (see: Sergio Busquets). The latter is most certainly cheating and despicable. The former - well, this is where cultures divide, and I think those who exploit it do so with the view that their opponents are no more honest or wholesome given their approach to curtailing more skilful footballers. 

Sincerely,

A 50% Cheat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Olé said:

Weighing in late here, but I read a fascinating debate about this many years ago from a Portuguese perspective, which basically said that the style of football in Southern Europe and South America favoured ball playing skilful footballers moving at speed, whereas the style of football in Northern Europe favoured physical strong combative footballers trained to go in hard and disrupt. It argued that diving was not cheating but a response to the alternative style of football: if I'm going to try and play football and you're just going to kick me up in the air, then I'm going to try and deter you from doing that the only way I can.

I doubt that many will agree, but I do think it raises a point which gets conveniently avoided whenever this subject is raised. The word cheat is immediately used when diving is involved, but the word cheat is never used for limited footballers who go in hard without winning the ball. Foul, certainly. Dangerous, perhaps. Cheat - never. You are more likely to hear "that's a heavy tackle". Yet it's someone who is unable to compete on footballing terms so resorts to breaching the laws of the game to gain an advantage. Why is it any different? But we use language like "darker arts" only to refer to how others gain an advantage.

It's amazing double standards.

Personally I see a difference between those who feign contact when tackled running at speed (a universal trait - see: Gerrard - and for some people a defensible reaction based on the argument above) and those who feign contact to the face, or collapse at set pieces, or do anything else which has no precedent from any passage of play  (see: Sergio Busquets). The latter is most certainly cheating and despicable. The former - well, this is where cultures divide, and I think those who exploit it do so with the view that their opponents are no more honest or wholesome given their approach to curtailing more skilful footballers. 

Sincerely,

A 50% Cheat

My problem is what they are inflicting on a 'fellow professional'.

I don't know what you do for a living but if a 'fellow professional' of yours accused you of wrongdoing that you clearly did not commit there would quite rightly be outcry.

The player who kicks an opponent up into the air these days inevitably gets punished for that indiscretion end of, the player who feigns contact and then exacerbates that by rolling around as if he has been shot is after one thing only the hope that the 'fellow professional' is booked or worse sent off, but somehow in some quarters that is considered a skill, me I think it shows total lack of self respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/09/2017 at 09:49, RedRaw said:

We were 2-3 up with 8 minutes to go you cockwomble

:clap:

Made me laugh (Thanks)

New one on me so I googled it and found this :laughcont:

 

IMG_3895.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

:clap:

Made me laugh (Thanks)

New one on me so I googled it and found this :laughcont:

 

IMG_3895.PNG

Good,but not the picture I keep imagining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

I don't know what you do for a living but if a 'fellow professional' of yours accused you of wrongdoing that you clearly did not commit there would quite rightly be outcry.

The player who kicks an opponent up into the air these days inevitably gets punished for that indiscretion end of, the player who feigns contact and then exacerbates that by rolling around as if he has been shot is after one thing only the hope that the 'fellow professional' is booked or worse sent off, but somehow in some quarters that is considered a skill, me I think it shows total lack of self respect.

My point was less right or wrong, but the motives for those who do it and their reasoning (having heard their side of the argument), which I tried to get across.

I don't actually agree with your response because as I illustrated there are different varieties of diving and to say "clearly did not commit" is perpetuating this myth that everything is "dark arts" done without precedent in the course of play. If a limited footballer comes steaming into a footballer trying to play skilful football at speed, just because said footballer can avoid the challenge, if they do go down it doesn't simply make the opponent an innocent victim - and it does deter such tackles in future. 

You also seem to place disproportionate concern with the wronged where bookings are concerned and yet nothing on the risk of serious injury. It's bizarre because to use your analogy, if someone misrepresents me at work, I can trust the good judgement of whoever the arbitrator is, or even failing that by way of escalation/appeal. If someone breaks my legs at work, whether or not they get punished is absolutely irrelevant, they are out of work, reduced earnings, career jeopardised regardless.

I'm not defending diving by the way, but you describe extremes of the behaviour while not recognising the other side of the coin. Moral outrage at the 'professionalism' subject in these matters is warranted only if it is applied equally to the professionalism of more limited footballers who play simply to disrupt the game, often knowing full well that they will be committing offences. Frankly both cultures just reinforce their own self-righteousness in ignorance of the reasons for their opponents approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Olé said:

My point was less right or wrong, but the motives for those who do it and their reasoning (having heard their side of the argument), which I tried to get across.

I don't actually agree with your response because as I illustrated there are different varieties of diving and to say "clearly did not commit" is perpetuating this myth that everything is "dark arts" done without precedent in the course of play. If a limited footballer comes steaming into a footballer trying to play skilful football at speed, just because said footballer can avoid the challenge, if they do go down it doesn't simply make the opponent an innocent victim - and it does deter such tackles in future. 

You also seem to place disproportionate concern with the wronged where bookings are concerned and yet nothing on the risk of serious injury. It's bizarre because to use your analogy, if someone misrepresents me at work, I can trust the good judgement of whoever the arbitrator is, or even failing that by way of escalation/appeal. If someone breaks my legs at work, whether or not they get punished is absolutely irrelevant, they are out of work, reduced earnings, career jeopardised regardless.

I'm not defending diving by the way, but you describe extremes of the behaviour while not recognising the other side of the coin. Moral outrage at the 'professionalism' subject in these matters is warranted only if it is applied equally to the professionalism of more limited footballers who play simply to disrupt the game, often knowing full well that they will be committing offences. Frankly both cultures just reinforce their own self-righteousness in ignorance of the reasons for their opponents approach.

i'm sorry but you seem to be making up exactly what you think I am saying.

To answer the highlighted sentence players who commit cowardly, horrendous or dangerous tackles are so punished either at the time or retrospectively and those punishments are normally severe and quite rightly so, because the outcome are or might be career threatening and that is the extremes of behaviour that you are describing, so that dealt with and both in agreement.

The limited players that you describe them have and are being dealt with and quite severely and the sadly the cheats who set out to gain an unwarranted advantage of a free kick, penalty and the added unwarranted advantage of a fellow professional becoming yellow carded or red carded are not being properly dealt with despite the promise of a crackdown.

One question just for clarification, if one of your gifted player runs into a limited player who is just occupying the space stood standing still, who has the right of way?, I am not talking about a limited player who deviates in a deliberate blocking action, I am talking about a player who is stood still.

Also I notice that the pundits believe that the Mane sending off for Liverpool at Manc although correct by the letter of the law, was incorrect because they would expect him to go for the ball, even though he was ignoring his duty of care for the safety of an opponent, where does that one sit in your analogy?.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...