By Nitram
Following on from Tony’s previous article Perfidious media link with ManC to launch attacks on all things Arsenal, I thought I’d have a look SKY Sports post match interview that I feel has fuelled this latest bought of media hatred towards Arsenal.
It was Patrick Dividson‘s post match interview with John Stones, and as you will read, it was HE that suggested Arsenal were using the Dark Arts. Not Stones. Davidson, was constantly trying to wind Stones up, putting words in his mouth. Stones, unfortunately, allowed himself to be led down this path and give what I felt was a pretty embarrassing interview, but SKY, and it seems every man and his dog in the media has lapped it up. Let’s have a look at what was said, and how Davidson manipulated the whole interview into an assault on Arsenal, and a love-in for Man City
This is the interview:
John Stones: A difficult afternoon for both teams. How they stop the play. How they use the side of football that not many teams do, make it difficult, slow it down, get the keeper on the floor, so they can get the information on, so we have to control our emotions during those times, I felt that we did and that it was a good battle today. A lot of tackles. Some silly decisions, you know but it’s hard to kind of digest it all straight after the game but we come away with a point. Towards the end of the game it could have been us losing three points or, yeah, well review it. We’ve got a game in two days which is quick and fast. I think how we fought to the end is credit to us.”
So, basically Stones is moaning about a team with ten men trying to control the game by slowing it down. WOW. What on earth did he expect Arsenal to do? Take it to City?
Patrick Davidson SKY interviewer:
“Now, I don’t want to put words in your mouth [but I am going to anyway] but you’re basically saying that Arsenal have mastered the dark arts and it’s very frustrating to deal with that.”
Yet one thing Stones certainly didn’t say was that Arsenal have ‘Mastered The Dark Arts’. Davidson said that. He didn’t even say it was ‘frustrating’ to deal with’, he said they have to “control their emotions”, and yes they do. As do Arsenal when they have a player sent off. It’s what professionals are supposed to do, but the fact Haarland felt the need to throw the ball at Gabriel’s head and Guardiola felt the need to kick his chair suggests their control wasn’t quite as good as Stones is suggesting it was.
But hey, when the officials let those incidents pass without a word (or indeed a card of course) you could get the impression they did.
As I said, Stones said nothing of the sort. What he said was, “I wouldn’t know if they’ve mastered it. They’ve done it for a few years.”
Done what? Slowed the game down? Is that not allowed then?
Stones then said, “We know to expect that. You can call it clever or dirty, whichever way you want to put it.”
Yes, you can call it clever. In fact it is clever. But I fail to see how under any judgement slowing the game down can be called ‘Dirty’ or ‘whichever way you want to put it’. Okay, maybe genius, unbelievable, too much for City to deal with. But it certainly isn’t ‘dirty’. But of course Davidson lets Stones off with that one.
Stones then continued, “They break up the game. Obviously (it) upsets the rhythm for everyone. They use it to their advantage and I thought that we dealt with it really well. It’s not easy when those things happen and you are trying to gain momentum. You try and get your foot in the game and try and get above them, you know those little stoppages stop that and we controlled our emotions really well.”
So again, Arsenal are doing nothing wrong other than slowing the game down. Yes we had players going down with cramp but apart from the one time when Raya may have gone down ‘tactically’ (a rouse I have seen used by a few teams under the cosh) every other one looked pretty genuine to me, to the point that Calafiori, Timber and Martinelli had to go off.
But Davidson wasn’t finished trying to wind up Stones:
“Last one, you said in your answer before that there were silly decisions. Meaning from them, from you, from the referee.
Stones replied, “A whole load of things really. Probably what everyone expects watching a big game like this. The drama. And when we’re involved in it you want to be level-headed, not to make silly fouls, take silly yellow cards and I felt we did that.”
City be level headed? Not make silly fouls? In case Stones hadn’t noticed it was us defending for our lives on the edge of the box. It was Arsenal who had to be ‘level headed’ and not make ‘silly fouls’ and ‘take silly cards’, not City.
Stones: Obviously they made it difficult for us. The majority of the game being so deep. Having so many people around the box. Yeah, it was a day that we’ll have to definitely review, and we’ll take a lot of positives from.”
…. And what positives are they Stones? That you struggled to break 10 men down? That you kept your heads just because a team slowed the game down and defended well against you. Well done.
But Davidson still wasn’t finished trying to wind up Stones: “Do you think that today was the first time we saw a bit of needle introduced into this rivalry?
Stones: “I think for the past few years we’ve had a rivalry that’s been growing. One that we thrive off.”
And excuse me for saying but endless whinging about Arsenal slowing the game down and accusations of ‘Dark Arts’ hardly suggest it’s something you ‘thrive on’ [the phrase is actually “thive on” not “thirve off” does it? Quite the opposite in fact.
Stones: “…..and one that we always want to come out on top. So, to sit here with a point is difficult, especially at home. We always want to come away with three. But as I said before. How we managed the game, and how we came away with a vital point in the later stages of the game is something that we should be proud of.
—————-
And there we have it. Whinging and whining as if they are the ‘victims’ in all this, and just because they haven’t recently come out on top, and they didn’t like it.
As the headline suggests, I believe it is that manipulative and malevolent interview that has triggered off yet another wave of media criticism and hatred of Arsenal. If any other team had performed as heroically as our boys did they would be praised to the rafters.
It is a disgrace and shameful what is happening today, but it proves one thing I think we already knew. The media’s love of City, and their desire to support them in every way they can, knows no bounds.
I watched the interview and thought that Stones was out of his depth, Davidson on the other hand was manipulative and determined to get Stones to make a statement. I’m not sure that media hatred was re-energised, it’s never been anything other than hatred and disdain. I hope at the end of the season we will be hated more and reasons given on how we cheated our way to the title. By which time City 115 will be exonerated or picked upon depending on the outcome!
Excellent article Nitram!
I posted this earlier on another site but I believe it pertains to this post .
The brown envelope hangs heavy over Oliver’s head. Every decision he makes in a City match is subject to scrutiny against it . What appals me is that the media know about it , the players know it , the supporters know about it and so do the PGMOL and yet they still appoint him to the most contentious games featuring City.
If they really wanted to stifle the murmurings of conspiracy and corruption they would not let him referee City’s games but they blindly and arrogantly carry on because they can.
By picking on Arsenal as one team to address these rules they ensure that fans of other teams will not wake up and complain. All of my Spurs , Wham and Chelsea supporter friends think it’s all good fun and are taking the moral high ground and they are our neighbours , any team north of Watford treat us as public enemy number one anyway so PGMOL know that if they ride things out for a couple of weeks it will pass and they can just carry on without any real recrimination.
By the very letter of the law Trossard should not have given Oliver his big chance but at the time I commented that he might have thought it was the half time whistle . Back in the day a referee would have used common sense and called the half over and diffused the situation but was this payback for the envelope ?
We will never know and even if it creeps out later it’s too late and the damage is done , All Arteta can do is think about how to make the players think about their actions because if you don’t give them the chance , they can’t do it.
The interviews after the game were conducted in a totally adverserial manner toward Arsenal in fact the interviewer was trying to put words into Arteta’s mouth but he was too canny to fall for it . It would be nice if he could have interviewed Oliver as well but that would never be allowed.
porter
“All Arteta can do is think about how to make the players think about their actions because if you don’t give them the chance , they can’t do it.”
This is not only very true but very very sad that the PL is so bent that it has come to this.
And of course another thing to bear in mind porter, is that Arteta has already had to change our play to a non tackling style, or at least keeping tackling to a minimum, in an attempt to reduce our card count in that department.
But as Tony has pointed out, now we have done that, all that has happened is that the PiGMOb have started throwing cards at us like confetti for transgressions that they laughingly call ‘other’.
Other being such a vague concept that they can pretty much send you off for looking at them.
I honestly don’t know what we can do when not only is it so obvious that we get treated far more harshly than anyone else in that department, but the media are in full support of them, and fans of other teams are either so tribal they cant or wont see it, or else they just find it funny.