UK time is: 17:42:42
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

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

Pulis in his own Write

Tony Pulis has reacted angrily to Arsene Wenger's 'out of order' observations on Stoke's tendency to employ a robust physical approach to their version of the game of football. He refuses to take it lying down, though that is often the very position that Stoke's opponents find themselves in, and has embarked on a letter writing campaign in order to ensure that justice is done and that Wenger doesn't watch Stoke play anymore.

We didn't fight two world wars so that Wenger could give his opinion, Pulis has protested.

Apart from a letter of complaint to Arsenal Football Club, apparently protesting that Wenger shouldn't have been able to see Shawcross kick Gomes in the recent game against Spurs, he has also copied the letter to the Premier League and the Football Association demanding that Wenger be blindfolded whenever any Stoke games are broadcast. It is a suggestion that the PL are apparently contemplating extending to other viewers.

Pulis is also believed to have written to the Mothers' Union in support of Shawcross' Mum who is naturally distraught at the suggestion that young Ryan has ever deliberately kicked anybody before as well as the Countryside Alliance, likening Wengers comments on Stoke to unfair campaigns against foxhunting, cockfighting and bear baiting. A first draft of letters to the Police, NSPCC, Royal College of Surgeons and the People's Trust for Endangered Species are understood to be in preparation.

Meanwhile Wenger finds himself under more pressure as a letter is now understood to be on the way from the Rugby Football Union protesting that their game isn't anything like as physical as Stoke's and claiming that Arsene was 'out of order' in saying it was.

Join Vital Arsenal

Want to comment on this article? It's easy to register , simply click the link and enjoy getting involved (you can even win prizes!)

Message Board To visit the message board, click here. Get involved

Use your social login to comment on front page articles. Login using you Facebook, Twitter, Google or LinkedIn accounts and have your say!

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

The Journalist

Writer: Amos Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Sunday August 29 2010

Time: 12:44PM

Your Comments

My favourite part was when Tony Penis said AW was bang out of order to Ryan Shawcross. Yeah Arsene, what did Shawcross ever do to Arsenal?
Little Dutch
Next Pulis will be suing Mcdonalds for burning his oversized mouth on an apple pie.
Shawcross never meant to hurt Ramsey and Wenger was out of order saying he did. Anyone who saw the video knows he went for the ball 100%!
Vanilla Ice
Go away.
Eh no! You Gooners don't like discussing things do you! You just think that everything Wenger says is gospel and every other fan/manager/ref/pundit is out to get you! It's sad really. Most people actually like Arsenal because of the football they play but things like this turn people off.
Vanilla Ice
Well turning you and your inane drivel off would be a result. Haven't you got an Everton game to watch?
Vanilla, you don't think that subject has been done to death here?Read this, take it on board, then don't bother scrapping for the debate on it, it's boring and infuriating.
Little Dutch
Ye I do at 4 o'clock! And how am I "driveling"? You think Shawcross wanted to hurt Ramsey... A simple Yes or No answer will suffice!
Vanilla Ice
Vanilla Ice, about as intelligent and relevant as his name sake.
Ozi Gooner
@LD - I didn't bring it up!
Vanilla Ice
Who gives a ***** if he meant to break is leg, if I kill someone in a car accident driving irresponsibly it doesn't matter if I meant it, I go to jail.
Ozi Gooner
@ Ozi Gooner - well having finished college with an honours degree I would be classifies as HIGHLY intelligent!
Vanilla Ice
@ Ozi Gooner - it was a 50/50 tackle and it was unfortunate that Ramsey was hurt but for Wenger to say it was deliberate is a disgrace. He was doing anything "irresponsibly". He was just trying to win the ball and he was beat to it. There are much worse tackles every week but people just don't get injured!
Vanilla Ice
For a start vanilla, I'm troubled vanilla it says a lot for your intelligence that Pulis calling Wenger out of order for mentioning Shawcross kicking someone doesn't trouble you, but Wenger calling someone out of order for snapping a player's leg does. Secondly, show me the quote where Wenger said Shawcross intended to hurt Ramsey. I believe his exact words were, "Please, spare me the stories about what a good guy Shawcross is." He was probably referring to people like you, who take their cue from the media without independent thought.
Little Dutch
Right, Shawcross committing tackle on halfway line at 100mph recklessly and with brute force and speed and (whether intentional or not) snapping players leg."Unfortunate." Wenger being unhappy about it. "Disgrace." Jesus, go and read the sun online or something, I'm sure there are plenty of other dribbling zombies on there that you can debate with- so long as the sun tells you what it is you're supposed to be uposet about first.
Little Dutch
I think Vanilla killed his brain with a poisonous mushroom.
If you are intelligent, highly or otherwise, you wouldn't have to rely on claims of academic qualification under an anonymous internet username. Your intelligence would be measured by that displayed in your posts - and in this case that's probably the most reliable way to judge yours.
Oh ye I agree with everything the media say! They only speak the truth... I never mentioned what a "good guy" he was. I just said he never meant to hurt anyone. He could be a dickhead for all I know. And (@ Ozi Gooner) judging someone's intelligence by their Vital username is pretty pathetic! Who cares what Pulis says... it's his job to protect his players from other managers. If someone said something about Fabregas I'd expect Wenger to defend him. YOU GUYS HAVE TO GET OVER THIS "THE WORLD AGAINST ARSENAL" THING. I came on to discuss an article and have gotten little discussion, more like abuse off some. You guys have to accept that maybe even Wenger can be wrong sometimes!
Vanilla Ice
@ iceman, I've taken heaps of mushrooms and I'm not even close to as braindead as this mong
Ozi Gooner
Vanilla Ice
Nobody hear is going to politely debate you over whether or not Shawcross intended to hurt anyone or what his intentions were, frankly, none of us give a flying ***** what his intentions were. We give a ***** that yet another promising player had has leg snapped in half, and not just by the individual responsible, but by an entire nations backwards arse attitude to the game of football and the right way to play it. Take your Little Britain opinions somewhere else, they're not welcome here.
Ozi Gooner
The article isn;t about what Wenger's done it's about what Pulis has done. Yet you didn't mention Pulis in your first five or six posts. Where have we said there is an Arsenal v the world mentality? Could it just be that Pulis is acting like a dick on this occasion? What would we have to confess to? Where in the article would we have cause to reproach Wenger? Why bring up Wenger's comments (which you fabricated anyway) in relation to the Ramsey incident? My comment was to do with the article, yours were just a hotch potch of perceived Wenger criticisms you tried to wheel out which had zero to do with the article. What did you want from the article or the comments? Just random rabbling about things Wenger might have said or done incorrectly over the last 14 years?
Little Dutch
And you have to be able to accept that Wenger can be right sometimes. What on earth is it you're protesting about in discussing this article? The only person to bring up Shawcross' illegal challenge for which he was redcarded at the time was you. He was 'tried' and found guilty. The article is only concerned with the pompous nature of Pulis' protest not his right to do so.
Ha wrong again... I'm not British. Just watched the tackle again. you guys are way off the mark. 50/50 tackle that they both went for. Funny how everyone, except Arsenal supporters, accepts that it was a terrible thing to happen but it was just an accident. And as for Wengers interview after... he talked about it being a "coincidence" that you've lost 3 players to bad injuries in 5 years. Eh did you not see the Everton injury table last year, or the Spurs one?
Vanilla Ice
Am I the only one who can read?? Little Dutch's first comment "Yeah Arsene, what did Shawcross ever do to Arsenal?" I think that means that he brought it up, not me! WRONG AGAIN BOYS!
Vanilla Ice
My God you're childish, I already said in my last comment that that had a bearing on the article, your rants against Wenger- who barely features in this piece, had zero to do with it. I saw the Everton injury table but I don't recall three Everton players in three years leaving the pitch with bones poking out of their socks. Shawcross didn't intend to snap Ramsey's leg, no. Why can't you get it into your thick skull that nobody cares if he did or didn't. Read the link I posted (with your master's degree, I'm sure you can muster up the ability to read properly), he was reckless, end of discussion. His intentions are not important and nobody has tried to debate them except for you.
Little Dutch
Who said it wasn't an accident? I'm sure it was an accident, very few people (Roy Keane excluded) go out intending to break peoples legs. It doesn't matter if it was an accident, it was still irresponsible and unacceptable.
Ozi Gooner
@ Little Dutch - I don't thin it was reckless! I think he went for the ball. I just assumed that you boys would be open for a debate and a bit of banter but have now realised that your just idiots. Wenger is god and can do no wrong... never forget that!
Vanilla Ice
I thought LD was referring to the Shawcross challenge on Adebayor a couple of seasons back! But even if LD was referring to the Ramsey challenge - for which Shawcross was deemed at fault and redcarded lest it be forgotten - where does LD or anyone else say it wasn't an accident? The truth is you came here with a preconditioned state of mind looking to find some fault simply because you're unable to view anything Arsenal positively other than the way your closed mind dictates irrespective of what the article actually says.
But why did he go for the ball at that speed and with that force? Because if he times it right and wins it, what happens? The ball goes flying out for a goal kick and Ramsey goes flying into the air. What's the point of that? It's the same as driving at 100mph, you'll do it and get away with it 99 times, but when you travel at that speed you're not in control. So when you're driving at 100mph one time and get it wrong and hit a pedestrian stepping into the road, your intentions and how nice a bloke you are, are meaningless. It's a reckless why to drive and you'd be punished by the courts accordingly. When you say, "I assumed you would be open for a debate" what you actually mean is, "I assumed you'd agree with me." Again your asserrtions about AW in that last post are bizarre and completely irrelevant, bear no weight on the discussion at all. I invited you to tell me where you Wenger had said Shawcross intentionally hurt Ramsey, and the best you could do was the word "coincidence." Which shows you've gone with the medai reaction and not the incident itself, about which AW said almost nothing- a good deal less than Pulis did too.
Little Dutch
I have also come to despise this veil of pretend sympathy people use when discussing this incident, "I feel for Ramsey but...." 1,000 word peroration at Arsenal or Wenger. That's really what you took from the incident? A 19 year old lad's leg is wrecked by a stupid, reckless challenge and people you turn it into a reason to vent your hatred to the Arsenal manager? Of course, they rehearse four or five pretend words of pseudo sympathy for Ramsey to look vaguley human before rolling their sleeves up and getting stuck into something else entirely. I pity you.
Little Dutch
Guys, have you not already been told, stop talking and feeding the trolls....he is a Stoke fan! Its like having a "masters degree" and trying to talk to a 7 year old about Law... ;-) At the end of the day, it gets dark. I love Wenger but i dont think everything he says is correct as know human being can do. I would say that Shawcross was massively slow compared to Ramsey and instead swang his leg as hard and as fast as he could (which still wasnt quick enough) and hit Ramsey instead. Accident, yes. Reckless, i think so. Ramsey had already knicked the ball away and Shawcross was still swinging at it but then i know its hard to stop what your doing while in motion. You, and obviously the management at Stoke have picked up on it more because of your player breaking a Arsenal players leg and Wenger has made comments before regarding the standard of the game. He prob said it so the ref would be aware that the media and himself will be watching him. These mind games have been going on for years, ***** me SAF has been doing it nearly all his carer. If he had said it about Stoke, your guys would of been like "whatever" but because its Wenger and there has been some previous between the clubs, you make a "complaint." What are you expecting out of it, a apology letter? or no more bad press about how Shawcross cant tackle to save his life, and just indangers someone elses?
I'm an Everton fan! I just don't agree that it was a horror tackle and I have nothing against Wenger or Arsenal... and yes LD, I do feel very sorry for Ramsey, it was very unfortunate! Had any manager said something I didn't agree with I'd say it. Check Vital City and even Vital Everton to see that I'm not just looking to abuse Wenger.
Vanilla Ice
For someone who doesn't have anything against Arsenal you sure spend a lot of time here bitching and moaning about the club and Wenger
Ozi Gooner
Whether Shawcross's leg-break was deliberate or just stupidity (I'd say the latter), and given his priors (attempted out-of-bounds assault on Adebayor, chopping down Jeffers), it's interesting that Wenger's comments on the Ramsey incident were so benign. Yet Pulis is sending letters to everybody with a slot on their front door. Tell me, who's the whiny baby here? I'd say cap-man.
@ Ozi Gooner - I think you'll find I usually post positive things about Arsenal. And what Pulis is doing is too sad to even discuss!
Vanilla Ice
Vanilla Ice is TRH in another one of his inane disguises. Ignore the mentally impaired one.
Funny article
Who's TRH?
Vanilla Ice
The fact that Tony Penis chose to focus entirely on Arsene's comments about shawcross but ignored his similar comments on huth says everything about Penis' motives.....
Anon 1
well having finished college with an honours degree I would be classifies as HIGHLY intelligent! Vanilla Ice Read more: its no big deal anymore to get a degree,i got one and i was even trying very hard
Oh ye i'm sure it was very easy for you!
Vanilla Ice
On another note, is that seriously the best looking Stoke fan we could find? Don't envy the lads there...
Ozi Gooner
Stay classy arse fans ;)
Wait - She has a face?
Vanilla Ice is so ******** stupid he must be a made up character or some sort of social experiment. Hey Vanilla, I'm going to get *****ed and drive like an idiot, I knock down a pedestrian and give them brain damage, do you think asking the question "Did I mean to hurt them?" is even relevant? Goddamn this debate has been done and dusted for decades, the idiots lost it and the law gives you a big clue as to why they lost it. Intention does not excuse recklessness and only an idiot who hasn't thought things through would mention this as a counter point to the thuggery of Shawcross.
Professor Calculus
It was as an attractive a face with a baseball cap on it as they had on the Stoke site! There simply wasn't anything better I'm afraid.
True Amos. The only other man in stoke who wears a baseball cap all the time is he whose name shall not be spoken.
"Hey Vanilla, I'm going to get *****ed and drive like an idiot, I knock down a pedestrian and give them brain damage, do you think asking the question "Did I mean to hurt them?" is even relevant?" I'll tell you what NOT relevant, comparing a tackle to someone going out and running over pedestrians. Clown. Vanilla has a valid point. Tackles are part of the game. Running over people is not part of driving. "Only an idiot who hasn't thought things through would mention this as a counter point." Nuff said? Probably not.
I agree with Pulis here. When it suits Wenger, as Red Nose pointed out, his teams can be nasty. The longer Wenger's team go without a trophy, the more of these attention deflecting comments we will see.
Clive 49
No Zbam, it clearly isn't a like for like comparison, in the same way an analogy is not meant to be taken literally, the point is very clear though, reckless behavior is not excused by intentions. So running over people is not part of driving? Really? I'm guessing as I type this someone has been killed by a car accident, if the person driving that car was drunk do you think "I didn't mean it" would get them off the hook? Look, you can't win this argument because it was already won and the idiots lost. This is basic primary school stuff and it baffles me how some people still don't get it.
Professor Calculus
Clive 49, I don't think Wenger is alone in the world thinking that the way Stoke play football can be over the limit. Arsenal have finished top of the fair play league countless times but that's not even the point, you could say Wenger is a hypocrite but that's not even the point, the point is that his observation is correct regardless of what you think about him or his team. You don't have to like a person to acknowledge that their observations are correct and the person making those observations doesn't have to represent the moral high ground to give their opinions any credence. If an Arsenal player snapped a Stoke player in half by jumping in to a reckless challenge and Pulis observed that it was dangerous behavior, would Pulis' character and past track record change the facts of the observation? No. People are just looking at Wenger rather than his opinions, why? Because his opinions actually stand up to criticism and analysis so they have a go at the man instead.
Professor Calculus
No Professor Calculus, running over people is not part of driving. Really.
Running over people while driving is as much a part of driving as breaking peoples legs when playing football when both are done recklessly and without consideration for other road users/footballers. It's not that difficult to understand really - unless you are determined not to do so.
That's the thing Amos, they're viewing this discussion through their "Wenger whining again" filter, they are determined not to see the obvious points made which in any other context they would come across as socially dysfunctional for denying such clear reasonable thinking, imagine having a conversation about a work related injury when the employer knowingly allowed the employee to operate the machinery without protective goggles. What kind of moron would even attempt to argue that the employer should be exempt from any responsibility. "These things just happen, it's unfortunate that mike is blind, no one meant for this to happen." "That's good enough for me, back to work we go."
Professor Calculus
Professor Calculus, I can be a killer and say killing is wrong.
Clive 49
Aren't you rather contradicting your earlier anti-Wenger point there Clive? :)
"That's the thing Amos, they're viewing this discussion through their "Wenger whining again" filter." For the record, I never mentioned Wenger at all. All I said was Vanilla had a valid point and comparing a tackle to a drunk running over pedestrians is so far off its laughable. "Running over people while driving is as much a part of driving as breaking peoples legs when playing football when both are done recklessly and without consideration for other road users/footballers." I must have missed that section in the rules of the road when I started driving but I'm sure tackles feature in the rules of football? Football is team A vs team B. Driving isn't your car vs pedestrians. Its not that difficult to understand at all.
Exactly Clive, but that's after the fact, we can all regret in hindsight, what we're talking about here though is a basic admission that people indeed have the foresight to try and avoid bad things happening. Smart people all over the world figured this out ages ago, we live in a world where hundreds of years hard work can be destroyed in seconds, so it's always going to be easier to be reckless and it's always going to be an uphill struggle to prevent reckless behavior. Wenger's point is that trying to immunise yourself from responsibility just because you didn't intend to do the precise thing you ended up doing is no argument at all, in fact it's a non sequitur. How do we know this? Because this way of thinking is not valid in all other walks of life. What are the chances? That football creates a whole new science and logic which the rest of the world and all it's laws should learn from and adopt or that Wenger is only saying what everyone else in any other non football context would also say? Pulis needs to step outside of his limited football world and apply some real world logic into his argument before he opens his ignorant gob next time. And like I said, this argument in any other context would not be happening, no one in the real world defends reckless behavior.
Professor Calculus
Zbam, it's so simple to understand you must either be stubborn and not want to understand it or stupid. Driving a car involves interacting with pedestrians (there are clues everywhere) which can be hit and killed, and so driving recklessly becomes an issue. Football involves tackles which can hurt and break people and so diving in recklessly becomes an issue. If you drive sensibly you are less likely to hurt or kill someone, if you tackle like Bobby Moore you are less likely to snap someone in half. Pretending this basic logic doesn't exist is either stupid or reckless, either way the fault sits with the denier not the person pointing out this logic which is universally accepted in every activity other than football it seems.
Professor Calculus
Hey Calculus, I've seen plenty of tackles that have been much harder than the one Shawcross put in to win said ball in the 'reckless tackle' and no legs were broken. I've seen lesser challenges result in broken bones. This, logically, leads me to believe that ACCIDENTS happen. I'm not excusing Shawcross for the tackle, for which he was punished, but I dont believe for a second he meant to break Ramsey's leg. Yes he wanted to let him know he was there, this happens in many games, it was just unfortunate that he broke the lads leg. Feel free to call me stupid if this helps you come to terms with my outlandish comments.
***** happens Aaron, get over it. Welcome to the Barclays Premier Leauge where accidents happen. I'm ******** tired of people saying "I don't believe he meant to break his leg". Who has said he did. Almost every single comment has pointed this out Zbam but you dont seem to want to get it through yout skull.
Goonerdrone, welcome to the party. I never said anyone claimed to say Shawcross did try and break his leg so I dont know who said he did? My apologies for confusing you.
Zbam, after this post I'm done talking with you because you simply can't or won't understand some real basic truths. How many times am I going to have to repeat myself? Intentions have nothing to do with it, intention is not an excuse for recklessness. Just so that we can move on, do you get that point? Do you understand that reckless behavior is inherently dangerous in it's own right, it doesn't need intention or malice to render the results of recklessness unacceptable. If you don't agree with that then I've yet to see you or any person in existence give an example which counters this truth. The hardness of the tackle has absolutely nothing to do with it, what Shacross did was not football, any chump could jump in like he did, I could take any thug off the street and order him to do that, it took no skill or technique, the timing was terrible, nothing about it resembled a profession where people are paid more in one week than most earn in a year, it was thuggery, reckless, clumsy, dangerous thuggery endorsed by a manager who needs his consciousness raised. Accidents happen all the time which is why we try to avoid behaving in certain ways which increase the likelihood of accidents happening, most sane people don't do the exact opposite to encourage accidents. Let's apply your logic to any other world event shall we, what about the recent BP oil spill? Did BP mean that to happen? Of course they didn't so I guess all is forgiven right, and the US Government said "Oh well, it's unfortunate but BP didn't mean it therefore let's just carry on as if no harm was done". That wasn't how the real world reacted was it? BP were made to pay for their mistakes and an acknowledgment of their reckless ways was factored into the billions of compensation they had to pay. Certain behavior increases the chances of mistakes happening and some mistakes are dangerous, knowing this fact and yet still going ahead with this behavior is reckless, breathtakingly arrogant and has no regard for others. To endorse and encourage a style of play carried out by players who neither have the intelligence or skill to tackle hard and safe is openly dangerous, when the inevitable accident happens you can't bail out and say "I didn't mean it". The drink driving attitude from 30 years ago was justified in the exact same pitiful and logically flawed points as your own, "I know I can drink and drive and stay in control". " I'm a good driver, yes I drink and drive but I'm a good driver", "It's part of the driving culture". "I didn't mean it, I'm not that sort of person, I would never hurt anyone". If you don't get it yet then you don't get it, but others do get it and to them you just sound dated and stupid. Why should football function as if it's above and beyond all the logic and laws in the real world, and why do people throw all intelligence and logic out of the window when they start to analyse the game? It's pathetic.
Professor Calculus
I'm gonna post this link one more time, largely because I don't think "the haters" bother to read it Read it free of your anti Wenger defence mechanism and try to absorb the incredibly simple point is makes.
Little Dutch
I think its probably a futile ambition to believe any of those dissenting voices here have any real interest in understanding the point made - even one as simple as that expressed in that link. It doesn't even take a college degree to be able to absorb it - just a reasonably free mind.
if drink driving,speeding, using your mobile phone whilst driving was not a problem,why are there laws to discouraging these actions....if reckless, dangerous tackling is not a problem why are there rules to discourage these actions, what does it say about the people who commit these actions and hurt others....
For a manager and a football club that's supposed to be so uber-macho and uber-tough, manly men dontcha know, Pulis and Stoke supporters are mighty sensitive wimps, aren't they? Wenger is such a worthless, pathetic, irrelevant twit that they despise and ridicule so much, yet his comments seem to be quite important to them. I'm struck by this article and the thread because coincidentally, a couple of gooner friends and I sat down last night to re-watch that game with Stoke where Ramsey was assaulted by a talentless hack whose career of breaking ankles, knees and legs is well known to anyone who cares to research his miserable record. That same nice, gritty English lad earlier in the game whinged and moaned to the referee about a Cesc tackle, demaning the ref book him. Pulis did the same after another Cesc tackle. That's something universal about these "macho" clubs: they love to dish out the thuggery and preen about their testosterone levels but the minute they get some of their own treatment from a scrawny little gunner - WAAAAAA!!! Ref, he hit me! VI & Clive, get this thru you stupid brainless heads: INTENT IS IRRELEVANT! Repeat that a gazillion times now: INTENT IS IRRELEVANT! The rules say absolutely nothing about intent. And exactly WHICH players are "that kind of player"??? Nobody at Arsenal EVER said that Shawcross or Taylor intended to hurt anybody. But you're too stupid to talk about the real issues instead of completely irrelevant media-driven hypocritical bull*****. If that had been Gallas or any other Arsenal player (esp. a foreigner), the media would've been all over him and you would be attacking him for his recklessness and total indifference to the consequences of such wild, out of control tackles.
Zbam, he doesn't have to have meant to break his leg. Ok, let me indulge you by giving you an example where an Arsenal player is the bad guy, maybe you'll see the sense then: A few seasons ago, Diaby got sent off for a foul in Bolton's Steinsson. Steinsson didn't break anything, but had he broken, it would have been, in my opinion, been Diaby's fault. Coz the force he jumped into it with was not commensurate with the job of retrieving the ball, the timing was very poor, and the stage in the play was that there wasn't anything he was fighting for. And Diaby should know better, having been both a victim as well as the "giver" on a serious injury from a reckless tackle.
Gaga Always worth posting.
Little Dutch
No matter what Cesc does from now on, I will always love him for shushing Pulis like that. Just brilliant.
Have you guys read Ian Holloway's recent comments re AW? Blackpool manager Ian Holloway has rubbished Sam Allardyce's comments about Arsene Wenger talking to opposition managers after games: "It was great to sit down with Arsčne Wenger and talk football for a few minutes after our game at Arsenal. He had a glass of wine, I had a beer and he was lovely to speak to."
Been picked up here jaelle
Little Dutch
truth sayer ffc
Ah, thx for the link, LD. Interesting discussion on the forums, I sometimes go over there to check them out. I also remember a couple of yrs ago the Independent writing about Everton & Moyes - the first paragraph mentioned Moyes & AW having a meal together and AW talking about Everton's "momentum" at the time. So AW is not, as others would claim, "aloof" to all his counterparts.
Nice postscript from this article that the FA don't see anything wrong with the comments Wenger made which obliged Pulis to write off to all and sundry. Pulis is still waiting to see if his letter will be published in the agony column of Womans Weekly magazine.
truth sayer ffc
Dear Deidre, I am the manager of Stoke City football club.........
Little Dutch
Good on you Tony Pulis for backing yourself up and fighting your corner. Up the Potters!!!
Tony Rocky Horror

Have Your Say

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

Recent Arsenal Articles

Plugging A Hole At The Back (Monday December 22 2014)

Loan Exit For Sanogo? (Monday December 22 2014)

Arsenal MotM v Liverpool? (Monday December 22 2014)

Stats: Liverpool v Arsenal (Monday December 22 2014)

Arsenal Games Switched For TV (Friday December 19 2014)

Bellerin To Play With More Freedom Now (Friday December 19 2014)

Wenger - Monaco Completes The Circle (Friday December 19 2014)

Archived Arsenal Articles

List All Vital Arsenal Articles
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll

Vital Members League (view all)

1. Amos. 91
2. Naijagunner 56
3. Galway Gooner 34
4. paul_ownz 28
5. shewore 22
6. Wyn Mills 20
7. luckys_10 14
8. Little Dutch 13
9. Nwankwo25 11
10. alwaysgunner 10

League Results (view all)

Latest Results
Liverpool 2 - 2 Arsenal
Arsenal 4 - 1 Newcastle
Stoke 3 - 2 Arsenal
Arsenal 1 - 0 Southampton
WBA 0 - 1 Arsenal
Arsenal 1 - 2 Man Utd

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
3. Man Utd 17 9 5 3 12 32
4. West Ham 17 9 4 4 10 31
5. Southampton 17 9 2 6 15 29
6. Arsenal 17 7 6 4 9 27
7. Spurs 17 8 3 6 -1 27
8. Swansea 17 7 4 6 3 25
9. Newcastle 17 6 5 6 -5 23

Breaking League News

Yedlin Work Permit Secured?
» Spurs : 22/12/2014 17:14:00
20-goals Is Kane's Next Target
» Spurs : 22/12/2014 17:06:00
Lennon....Lucas - Easy Mistake To Make!
» Spurs : 22/12/2014 16:51:00
Diarra And Lennon Linked Again
» Q.P.R. : 22/12/2014 16:22:00
Redknapp Would Be Interested In Morrison
» Q.P.R. : 22/12/2014 16:13:00

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

Arsenal MotM
Suggested By:  Site Staff
Szczesny 34%
Chambers 0%
Debuchy 8%
Mertesacker 0%
Gibbs 0%
Oxlade-Chamberlain 0%
Flamini 0%
Cazorla 50%
Sánchez 8%
Giroud 0%
Welbeck 0%
Sub:-Coquelin 0%
Sub:-Campbell 0%
Sub:-Monreal 0%