Subject: Celtic v Arsenal

All english league games are televised, most with a single camera on the roof of the ground, but with premiership games there are multiple camera angles. In the prem I can see no reason why they shouldn't have a 4th official checking on stuff like this. Give each team 3 "challenges" like they get in tennis, and they won't be stopping everything every 2 seconds, job done.

I like the 3 challenges bit.. like hawkeye... cool idea..make it so number 1... ;-)

Anyone got any thoughts on this?

yes i do in fact - im not a celtic fan to start with.

The dive i think was pretty wrong. From a keeper point of view i could be over critical of boruc in that he made it easy for eduardo to do the dive - we know it happens and therefore should be prepared for it. One thing that really bugs me is this -

history first tho


I first started watching the premiership when Arsenal had pieres (sorry for spelling) bergkamp, viera and the likes - i was amazed at the football they were playing and totally applauded Mr Wenger in what he was bringing to the premiership. I still sit their with mouth aghast as some of his teams passing and movement - as a coach myself its amazing to watch the technique of these players.
What put me off was Mr Wengers total inept ability to see what was right in front of him - it was never his players fault, always the others or referee.


So back to the story.

On Wednesday night he was asked "so do you think it was a penalty then?"
Reply - "im not sure i didnt see it" - yeah yeah yeah

to which the interviewer had pre empted it and had a tv sitting waiting with the penalty. They watched it.

Wenger "whats the problem?"
Interviewer - so do you think it was a penalty?
Wenger "absolutely he clearly took his trailing leg away".

I MEAN COME ON SON what are you acheiving apart from sounding like a complete numpty

Wenger was interviewed last week and admitted what we all already knew.. that in actual fact.. he does not suffer from occasional blindness ...he sometimes lied to protect his players from the indefensible.. this I would suggest it's another case of that....

I think now Ronaldo has gone we need another diver and at present he gets my vote.

yup i can understand that - but to say "i didnt see it" "nope that was a penalty" is just plain stupid. Saying something like "well it may have been a penalty and maybe not - its difficult for the referee in these circumstances" deflects the question away from him and onto the ref. He needs to get some "how to work the media" courses.

I am glad Eduardo gets punished. There is difference between dives. Some are just suspicious, but that one was very obvious and he gets what`s he deserved. Every team has a it`s own "divers" - it`s just the part of football on these days.

I agree, in many ways he's a great manager...but his handling of contraversial incidents (involving our players at least) is less than convincing.. that said I'm hard pressed to think of many top managers who'd have come out and condemned their player in the same situation..

Where did Wenger say it was a penalty though? The stuff I saw / read was along the lines of (from the BBC)

on the night:

He went down, for what reason I do not know. Having seen it again on television, it doesn't look a penalty."

The Gunners boss added: "I believe really that it was not a penalty but I am also not sure that the keeper didn't touch him with his right knee, having seen it again.

"I do not think he (Eduardo) would have complained if the penalty was not given.

"Is it acceptable? I never asked in my life any guy to dive to win a penalty but sometimes the players go down because there is no other way to escape the tackling of the keeper. Sometimes they dive."

and today...

"I'm the first to say that it doesn't look like a penalty but it's another thing to say that he went down with intent."
(edited)

who'd have come out and condemned their player in the same situation..

Certainly not mate - i would expect a manager to get sacked for condeming his players. Its what you dont say that makes people like you :D

On my point im not sure if it was shown on ITV in england but thats where the "it was a penalty" interview came from.

Ah fair enough.. I have to admit as soon as the match was over I was out walking the dog!

curiously enough the chaps I know that do the Carling Opta stuff (or whatever it is called these days) that tracks all the players and their antics during a match could jiggle it to run live and thus refs could use it to sort out these things.

Personally, I think the ref and linos are as much a part of footie as the ball and so are mistakes.

i think that players over act anyway when tackled, some things will never change. do we want hawkeye everytime a player is tackled? hell no! we dont want the best and most followed game in the world turning into a crappy american football esque sport.

er, it won't.

er, maybe the ball wont turn into an egg but meh.

Got to be honest, whilst I think it was a dive, I don't think you can say for certain that the TV angles show it was deffo a dive. There was one angle where Boruc may have caught his trailing leg. I think to condemn someone with video evidence, you must show that it's one hundred percent cut and dried. For those that think it IS one hundred percent cut and dried, you'll be able to find a picture/video where there's daylight between the two, surely. With a game that important on numerous levels, there'll be plenty of media coverage.

how does that work then ? I just assumed they had people in anoraks with clipboards.