Arsenal - Gutless FA Are Part Of The Problem
UK time is: 22:04:50
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

'If It's Football, It's Vital'

Gutless FA Are Part Of The Problem

The FA clearly haven't learnt a single thing from Aaron Ramsey's career threatening injury. Not one single god damn thing.

A couple of hours before the Stoke City vs Arsenal game kicked off, two people were removed from a football match because of one solitary tackle committed by one player.

During the the PL clash between Birmingham and Wigan, Brum's resident dirty bloke, Liam Ridgewell made a tackle on Wigan's James McCarthy, that was equal to, if not worse than the tackle that broke Aaron Ramsey's leg. It was a miracle that the Latics player did not suffer a similar fate to our own Rambo.

The flying lunge down by the corner flag was made with such force that it took out the player (making sure he suffered a recurrence of his ankle injury) and also sent said corner flag careering into the face of the linesman, cutting his head. The linesman had to be replaced by fourth official Steve Bennet.

Today the FA revealed they planned to take no further action against Liam Ridgewell because 'the referee saw the incident at the time and dealt with the situation at the time.'

Could there be any possibility that the referee was wrong? Maybe he didn't have a good angle? Because from the footage and the replays shown on Match of the day, I am 100% positively sure that the tackle was vicious, reckless and very worthy of a red card.

The gutless turds at Soho Square consistently hide behind the rule (the rule they created) that if the referee saw the incident and acted on what they saw, then no further action can be taken.


Oh ..... wait .......

Click here to join in the debate on the club forum.

The Journalist

Writer: Rocky7 Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Tuesday March 2 2010

Time: 5:46PM

Your Comments (oldest first)

Change to most recent first
Its a rule that makes no sense anyway. You cant act on an incident the referee has seen because apparently that would essentially mean you were re-refereeing the game. Yet surely, acting on something the referee hasnt seen is still re-refereeing the game? Whats the difference? You either let a match play out and accept everything that happens or you do the sensible thing - admit that a referee cannot see everything, admit that a referee cannot get every decision correct and therefore take action when its appropriate.
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 17:58:00

They don't have to change the rule. They have already set a precedent to deal with it in the case of the Ben Thatcher assault on Pedro Mendes a while back. They just have to have the will to deal with it.
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 17:59:00

They had no problem subverting that rule for Ben Thatcher ater his forearm smash on Pedro Mendes. (Thatcher was booked but still awarded a six match ban). But of course, that was because the media told them to. Not a watertight rule by any means, just another excuse from the most work shy bunch of freeloaders since the Royal Family.
Little Dutch
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 17:59:00

2nd time in 2 days you beat me to it Amos! Damn you!
Little Dutch
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 18:00:00

How ironic - as I type there is an advert for the HSE right above the league table on this site that simply says "Simple mistakes can shatter lives. Your actions could stop them happening."
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 18:02:00

yeah, it's a stupid rule... and the slippery slope argument is a dumb one as well... "well if we do this, then won't this happen, and so on, and so on..." do what you need to do... it's pretty ridiculous that arsenal has had TWO identical injuries in the span of two? years... something must be done...
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 18:36:00

Whilst I agree that bad challenges must be clamped down on, particularly those with malicious intent, I must point out the huge amount of trouble we would be in if the FA or some other body had free reign to 'adjust' refereeing decisions after the match.

The point about that Ben Thatcher/Pedro Mendes incident is that the FA finally took action against Thatcher because of the huge media storm that was whipped up about it - they lamely bowed to public pressure instead of sticking to their laws, even if their laws happened to be wrong. Several other dirty challenges that happened during the time between Thatcher/Mendes' actual incident and the time Thatcher was handed his sentence went completely ignored by the media and subsequently the FA, because they had a fish to fry.

Yes, the current law of not wanting to re-referee the game is bizarre and does allow for these sorts of situations to arise, but you can only really have a situation of 'all or nothing' when it comes to changing the ref's calls after the match - either every mistake, however trivial, should be reviewed or none of them should - if you start trying just to deal with the really shocking ones, like your kid Ramsey or McCarthy, then soon every manager who disagrees with a decision against his team, particularly if he believes it cost them the game will have a go - with good cause - about getting the decision 'reviewed'.

I'm in favour of seeing thugs punished as much as the next man, but you have to be so careful before you call for things like this.
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 19:22:00

Agree with Naoise. I think both players involved in the Ramsey challenge were unlucky (obviously Ramsey is a LOT worse off), but the challenge was not that bad - yes he's suffered a horrific injury that can happen with a mistimed challenge, and Shawcross' was not a wild lunge that was miles away from the ball. The interesting thing is that we do see these wild lunges aimed at taking the player down all the time - at spurs for example Gareth Bale gets chopped down at least twice a game when the ball is miles gone (and obviously this happens to Arsenal players all the time too). These are what need to be punished harshly, (including Defoe's wild lunge the other day I might add). Mistimed challenges like Shawcross' less so. In other words Ridgewell deserves the punishment that Shawcross has got.
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 19:41:00

The rule where you cant re punish someone if the ref casted a judgement on it - is appauling.
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 20:09:00

If someone gets brought down because of a mistimed challenge that has to be different from someone that is tackled "carelessly, recklessly and/or with excessive force". Apply that Law of the Game to Ridgewell as it should be (and ultimately was to Shawcross) and it becomes a lot simpler to distinguish those tackles. It's subjective but not really so hard to see the difference between the Ridgewell tackle and a mistimed one.
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 20:16:00

But Mendes is a foreigner !!! Surely Ben Thatcher was the victim in that one as he is a good English lad who wouldn't hurt anyone !
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 20:36:00

Its all about the media involvement. If they deem it to be worthy of retribution, then so be it. If they dont feel the urge to hype it up, then the FA simply go back to their Gentleman's club for more cigars and brandy and an afternoon nap. Ridgewell is a thug and should be no where near a football pitch, certainly not earning a wage from the game. But we live in the dark ages, still. And as long as the consensus is to overlook and even congratulate this ultra violent prehistoric approach to the game, then we will have to suffer the sight of neandethals being managed by neanderthals.
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 21:28:00

The issues surrounding the rules, the interpretation of those rules by the refs during the game, and the FA's response to contentious issues after the final whistle, are too many to address in one thread of this forum. HOWEVER, one point I would raise is the seemingly inappropriate punishment response to what can sometimes be quitr serious foul play. Whatever your vspecific views on Shawcross, Taylor and Hunt - specific to the recent Arsenal incidents - IF you can at least consider and for one moment put yourself in agreement that one or all of them warranted a straight red for violent play, then a 3-game ban is reprehensibly inappropriate. The rules as they stand mean only FA intervention can address this imbalance and I suspect it would take UEFA/ FIFA to deal with the real issue of ensuring the punishment fits the crime. For what it's worth, I've hald the long view - since Eduardo's injury - that the perpetuator should receive a minimum of 3-games ban, extendable for upto a year subject to when the injoured player is available for selection again - whichever comes soonest. This way, players would seriously think about wild and reckless challenges and I believe of the three, Diaby's and Ramsey's injuries may have been prevented if Hunt and Shawcross had engaged brains before goigo so hard into their respective challenges. Anyhoo, nothing will happen of course because this does not fit in with the media or FA agenda at this time. And it's only Arsenal we're talking about, bunch of whingers we are!
Report Abuse
02/03/2010 22:33:00

We all know the FA are a spineless bunch of wimps who only act when the single brain celled hacks that constitute the British media start having a scream up over something that goes against their own racist/xenophobic agenda's. Hence the national campaign to get Eduardo banned from football for a debateable dive, yet witness the national campaign to prove what a nice guy Martin Taylor was after Eduardo suffered a triple break, open fracture and dislocated ankle after aforementioned c***s disgraceful tackle on him. The media are as much to blame as the scumbag wastrels at the FA.
Report Abuse
03/03/2010 11:36:00

Just wanted to post here the comments on the Shawcross tackle from my favorite football pundit, who I think is a far far superior to those in the English football media. Even guys like Samuel and Barclay (who've written good pieces on Shawcross' "tackle") talk about the "intent" issue as if it has any relevance. Bobby McMahon, however, is the only pundit I've yet heard or read who flat out clearly says INTENT IS IRRELEVANT, THE RULES SAY NOTHING ABOUT INTENT! McMahon is an expat Scotsman who's lived in Canada for many years. He's the longtime resident football analyst for North America's Fox Soccer Channel, the most watched football-only TV network on the continent. McMahon routinely disses the UK football media's stereotypes and refuses to accept its "conventional wisdom." He's not a gooner but he likes Arsenal a lot and actually predicted we'd win the title this year. But he's quite fair and criticizes our poor performances without using the tired old cliches seen in the UK media. He spoke about the Shawcross tackle on Monday night's show. I'll post his comments in a separate post as this is already too long.
Report Abuse
03/03/2010 13:12:00

McMahon and the show's anchor started out by talking about the frequent "that's a harsh yellow card" from some commentators. McMahon: "When dangerous and excessive tackles are not punished, you get things like this." (video of Shawcross on Ramsey). He then says that there's been all this "contaminated" discussion about Wenger and Arsenal did this and that but "the bottom line is this isn't a tackle, this is a scythe. It is not a 50/50 tackle. If it's a 50/50 tackle, they both would arrive at the same time. So inherently it's not a 50/50 tackle. Shawcross does not tackle, he scythes through, Ramsey's leg is planted and it's a tragic double broken leg, 2 bones are fractured, it is excessive, it's reckless. And for commentators to claim it wasn't a bad tackle...well maybe they're right, it wasn't a tackle at all, it was an assault, it was awful. Intent doesn't matter, there's nothing in the rules about intent." He then refers to people in England going on about how nice Shawcross is, he's "not that kind of player," and shakes his head, saying "well maybe he's not but he did it" and there's a young man now lying up in hospital because of it.
Report Abuse
03/03/2010 13:20:00

Instead of posting all that, I just realized you can see Bobby's comments on youtube:
Report Abuse
03/03/2010 13:40:00

i agree that the rule should be changed but....... we did benefit from it when nasri stood on what ya call him's foot and no more action was taken against him when it probs would have as everyone who isnt arsenal hates arsenal but i am gonna say it WAS an accident cos im arsenal through and through
Report Abuse
03/03/2010 17:12:00

In the wake of the 'fantastic' support that Shawcross has been receiving by the media, I'd like to see Arsenal, Wenger and Aaron Ramsey himself, personally appologize to Shawcross for putting him in such an awkward, uncomfortable and completely unnecessary position and for causing him so much grievance and pain (and a massive 3 match ban). The same group should appologize to Stoke City for any insults that resulted with a loss of revenue for them and AFC should offer to cover all the costs, together with the costs for whatever help that Shawcross needs. AFC should appologize to the FA for the unnecessary bad publicity that the league has received because of the leg-breaks of 3 of our players and we should promise to train our players in how to stop putting limbs in breaking positions. Ramsey shouldn't have made such a big fuss out of it, after all, Eduardo and Diaby are playing again so no worries there.
Report Abuse
04/03/2010 15:47:00

Perhaps itís the media who are the source of all evil. Sadly a lot of fans will get their opinions from the media (unable to formulate one for themselves) and the media continue to churn out what they think the fan wants to hear. A never ending, poisonous cycle. The FA just jump when the heat gets too hot either from the media or FIFA/UEFA otherwise they donít want to make work for themselves.
Sir Henry
Report Abuse
04/03/2010 17:24:00


Have Your Say

Log in...
with your social network     OR     with your Vital account

Recent Arsenal Articles

Stats: Arsenal v Dinamo Zagreb (Tuesday November 24 2015)

Match Preview Arsenal vs Zagreb (Tuesday November 24 2015)

Wenger Confirms Injury Crisis (Monday November 23 2015)

Archived Arsenal Articles

List All Vital Arsenal Articles
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll
ScoopDragon Premier League Network Sites

Vital Members League (view all)

1. Naijagunner 20
2. Galway Gooner 13
3. Wyn Mills 5
4. Guyfox 2
5. phreddy 2
6. Nwankwo25 2
7. Afcdc 2
8. Pat Rick 1
9. Will-i-am10 1
10. Liam Daniels 1

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
1. Leicester City 13 8 4 1 8 28
2. Man Utd 13 8 3 2 10 27
3. Man City 13 8 2 3 14 26
4. Arsenal 13 8 2 3 12 26
5. Spurs 13 6 6 1 13 24
6. West Ham 13 6 3 4 4 21
7. Everton 13 5 5 3 8 20

Arsenal Fixtures (view all)

Breaking League News

Gunners Will Decide Their Own Fate After 3-0 Win
Ľ Arsenal : 24/11/2015 21:46:00
Ľ Arsenal : 24/11/2015 21:35:01
Maccabi Tel Aviv 0 Chelsea 4
Ľ Chelsea : 24/11/2015 21:34:00
11 Things Swansea City Fans Are Talking About This Week
Ľ Swansea : 24/11/2015 21:25:00
Maccabi Tel-Aviv v Chelsea - Team Sheets
Ľ Chelsea : 24/11/2015 18:53:01

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

MOTM vs Dinamo Zagreb
Suggested By:  
Cech 0%
Bellerin 0%
Kos 0%
BFG 0%
Monreal 0%
Flamini 0%
Cazorla 0%
Campbell 0%
Ozil 0%
Sanchez 0%
Giroud 0%
Debuchy 0%
Rambo 0%
Chambers 0%