by Tony Attwood
Over the weekend I used some of the findings we had on the relationship between fouls and yellow cards; you may recall the data that shows some clubs have to commit many, many more fouls than others to get yellow cards.
From this, the suggestion was made that we should not only look at fouls and yellow cards but also the number of tackles.
Of course, as usual, a number of people felt the need to put their point in an aggressive, sneering or dismissive manner – but sadly that is what seems to pass for conversation among some people these days. But ignoring that, and the fact that at first I thought the number of tackles had little to add to our understanding of the stats, I decided to have a look – not least because we’ve been so critical of The Athletic in not doing its research properly, I thought I ought to follow our own guidelines.
So I’ve added the number of tackles and done a chart for the two teams in yesterday’s game, plus two others. Then added three ratios – how many tackles lead to fouls (T/F), how many fouls lead to yellow cards (F/Y) and how many tackles does it take to get a yellow card (T/Y).
All figures are before Sunday’s games. Assuming the referee has no bias, then the higher the number in the T/F ratio the “dirtier” the team – a figure of 1.00 would mean that every tackle was a foul.
In the tackles column the number in brackets shows the position in a tackles league table. Leicester tackle the most, Burnley the least. Similarly in fouls and yellows. Arsenal are near the bottom in the number of tackles compared to other clubs, but are mid-table for fouls committed, yet get more yellows than anyone else. You might find that a trifle odd. I do.
| Club | Tackles | Fouls | T/F ratio | Yellows | F/Y ratio | T/Y ratio |
| Arsenal | 400 (14) | 259 (10) | 0,65 | 57 (1) | 4.54 | 7.01 |
| Burnley | 329 (20) | 270 (5) | 0.82 | 43 (13) | 6.27 | 6.65 |
| Leicester | 493 (1) | 237 (16) | 0,48 | 25 (16) | 9.48 | 19.72 |
| West Ham | 485 (3) | 258 (11) | 0,53 | 46 (9) | 5.60 | 10.54 |
Now the claim was made by correspondent “Jason” that Burnley’s manager has instilled an exemplary discipline in his team – yet the figures show they commit the fifth-highest number of fouls – despite having the lowest number of tackles. That takes some doing! It means Burnley commits fewer tackles, but refs think the tackles they do commit are pretty awful so they award fouls. But not so awful as to get yellows.
Arsenal commit a below average number of tackles, are given an average number of fouls against, but find a higher percentage of those fouls turning into yellow cards that you might expect.
Now there are all sorts of ways of committing a foul – but a poorly timed or deliberately illegal tackle is surely the most common, and so that measure is, for me if no one else, a measure worth utilizing – given there is a limit to the data available. As ever, we can only use the data we have.
The Fouls to Yellow card column (F/Y ratio) shows us once again the very, very odd figures of Leicester City – the team that tackles the most but seemingly, most wonderfully, gets most of the tackles right, and so gets very few yellow cards.
Now this is where we need the TV stations to be doing their job properly – by analyzing these Leicester figures in-depth with detailed TV reviews. It was the sort of work our fantastic “160 Game” team did, and because of the level of work involved there is no way I can ask them to repeat that level of work. If I even dared ask I would probably have to go into hiding, but it is the research the broadcasters ought to be doing. In fact I am absolutely certain Opta has done this and thus PGMO know it.
But let us come back to the “Burnley complaint” – the notion that our figures are not relevant because they do not include tackles. And this based on the notion that Burnley are something special because they are the least tackling team in the Premier League.
Well, yes, Burnley commit the fewest tackles of any PL team but are the fifth-highest foulers. Not every foul is from a bad tackle, but most are, so that indicates that as a fouling team Burnley are pretty bad. Something approaching 0.82 of their tackles are rated as fouls – and astonishingly high rate since the highest possible level is 1.0. Yet despite this propensity to get their tackles wrong, they don’t get that many yellow cards!
In round numbers Arsenal and Burnley are the same – they get around one yellow card for every seven tackles. But look at Leicester – they have undertaken 93 more tackles than Arsenal and 164 more tackles than Burnley, and yet they have picked up far fewer yellows than either club.
So the question is: are Leicester the perfect master tacklers, doing it so well, they hardly ever get a mistimed tackle, and rarely commit a tackle to break up a dangerous attack? Are Burnley the really clumsy tacklers?
Now when I have watched Leicester in the flesh (an occasional habit because although I’m a season ticket holder at Arsenal, it so happens that Leicester is my nearest ground) that is not the impression I get. Of course, impressions don’t count for much, so this again is where we need the TV companies’ help. Leicester’s figures are really weird and they really do need investigating further.
Another interesting question is, “Why is the media not covering these figures.” I mean, they really are extraordinary when you compare clubs in this way, and by and large at the centre of them are the referees. Surely it is a story.
And yet as far as I know, not one broadcaster or newspaper has brought this up. Maybe it is one for The Athletic? They publish complicated pieces and want to push into new ground. Surely it is a story for them.
You only have to look at yesterdays game to see that Arsenal commit so many cynical fouls to break up play as do Manchester City. The three yellow card yesterday were deserved and all to stop a goal zcoring opportunity…!
So much for an easy 0-3 away win as predicted by most red glasses wearing fans.
Enjoy your winter break.
Tackling is part of the game.
As fans all we want is consistency from referees , and each weekend we have inconsistencies .
Until all referees sing from the same hymn sheet regarding the laws of game we’re in trouble .
I’m going over old ground Arsenal vs Chelsea every player who tugged/pulled an opponent back in that game was yellow carded except one(1) why ? To top this our player appeals to the referee to be consistent and he gets yellow carded ( we don’t know if swearing was involved in his appeal ) . This is just one(1) example which was so blatantly wrong ( we know the consequences of this decision ) but as Tony says no one questions this crucial decision it’s brushed under the table . It wasn’t a maybe a tug/pull it was so how can a referee not give a yellow card when he’s punished everyone else who committed the same infringement
We know referees are not answerable to anyone so IMO nothing will change it’s up to the clubs to appeal to the FA , PIGMOL and the Premier League over the way they are refereed but it seems they are overall ok with it , it’s only the fans which complain .
Leicester have much better tacklers than Arsenal, simple. Any team with Xhaka, Sokratis and that clown Guendouzi in is going to get loads of yellow cards. Get over yourselves, you’re a mid-table team and the stats back up your league position.
Sorry to add a bit more , clubs , managers and players are not allowed to complain because of contractual reasons between everyone so the only people how can complain are the fans , again the media are also contracted in and can’t point out these inconsistencies , where do we go to get consistency .
Ok where to start with this article, obviously an arsenal fan trying to justify why their team is doing so badly…. must be a conspiracy by the refs to single them out, and why Leicester are doing so well is because they are being favoured by the refs, so last 2 games where blatant hand balls not given, 2 leicester players being fouled and almost injured in the process but nothing given doesn’t fit in to your rhetoric. The fact that arsenals whole success came in a period when the likes of Vieira would Adam’s et al would just kicked opponents off the field doesn’t matter, look arsenal are not a big team, have a bad recruitment strategy, an aging useless defence, hard to say 1 player from arsenal would get into lcfc side whereas 6 or 7 leicester players would start for arsenal, am tired of these ex big club fans trying to take away from a side in 3rd on merit just because their team will miss out on top 4. If u want to help your team, club and fans then write an article about what’s really going wrong with your club so your club looks at themselves and tries to sort it out
Tony
Being as unbiased as possible. Do you think Burnley tackled unfairly and dirty against Arsenal yesterday? Were yellow cards given appropriately?
I watched a good game with both sides in the main tackling hard but fairly.
So, as you started this by being critical about Burnley let’s end it on a positive note after an enjoyable game and a fair result.
Although I whole heartedly agree refs and all officials need to be accountable, and should justify major decisions after a game. If I did my job as badly as some of these I would be sacked. Refs need an external oversight, the amount of money and players careers that are involved
Interesting stuff. Leicester are indeed a strange one. When they won the league, i found their refereeing suspicious, Vardy only had to slightly stumble and they got a pen, a bit like the Champions elect this season.everything seemed to go their way back then for LCFC, as it seems to this season. They have at least two serial divers, Vardy and Maddison, for starters, who are never punished for this,perhaps they learn from this seasons masters, Firmino and Salah.
cannot see the clubs changing anything, the PgMoL make sure they dont do anything to upset the most powerful cubs and coincidentally, those favoured by the media, just look at the treatment Liverpool get from them these days.
Arsenal clearly have a problem with refereeing, Wenger was silenced, I suspect Ivan was pragmatic, political and out for himself, Emery it seemed didnt have a clue when dealing with the refs, and the club execs did and do very little, perhaps they cannot, or just dont have the clout of some, I strongly suspect the latter. This league is about Northern giants, plucky north/Midlands clubs, the occasional moneyed or media southerner, and as for AFC, they just have to be bloody good to overcome this, as we once were.
Arteta seems to me quietly scathing if not surprised on our officiating…”It was clear” a phrase we often hear from him on ref “mistakes”
It’s down to Leicester generally getting good tackles in whereas Arsenal and in particular Xhaka can’t tackle properly!
Thank you for not allowing my recent comments.So I will say them again.If there was a table for feigning injury or falling over Arsenal would be top.The power of the press.Please publish this.
Stop bloody whining, you were lucky to come away with a draw, so rather then accept the fact you were played off the park you resort to if and but blah blah blah. Sore losers without losing that takes some doing
RB: Not sure that has much to do with the statistics revealed in the article
Charles Howarth – not sure that has anything to do with the article
John Sutcliffe – details of why comments are or are not published are given on the Comments page which is there for all to read. I didn’t see all the comments yesterday, but basically on this site, making a statement such as you have done here, without any evidence, is not published. If we started publishing all those we’d have hundreds of comments per article and no one would read them. If you want to be part of a serious debate, give some evidence.
The Cally, there certainly does seem to be a lack of willingness among Burnley supporters writing to us, to consider any form of statistical evidence, along with a certain amount of abuse. Quite interesting in a strange way. A fair number of clubs do have supporters who understand statistics and evidence, so is Burnley different?
Sorry Mr. Attwood, My reply was more in response to the garbage written over the past 2 days
Ryan Kearns, I suspect you have written all that without actually seeing what is on this site. There are many articles here pointing out what has gone wrong with Arsenal. Would it not have been better for you to look at the site first?
We seem to have been getting a large number of comments that are very similar and which don’t abide by our normal rules about commentary on the site – see the page “Comments” for details.
I’ve tried to publish a small sample of the less offensive comemnts, with a reply in most cases to try and explain to readers who have not taken a look to see what this site is about, but sorting through all these does take time.
I think that’s a fair selection – but from here on, if your comment doesn’t appear it is probably due to a reason given in the Comments page.
And the two biggest reasons are a)simply calling the author or the article stupid or ill-informed, and b) not providing evidence.
This is an evidence based article, quoting figures mostly from the PL itself, so to argue against those figures one really does need some evidence.
@ Mandy
You say that Vardy only had to stumble to get a penalty the season they won the title. I completely agree. What made it most distasteful for me was that their centre-backs (Huth in particular) were completely immune from punishment whilst seemingly fouling anybody that went up for a cross in their area for the whole of that season.
As I’ve said before, there seems to be decisions made at the beginning of each season as to who is in or out of favour. To repeat my self, whilst captain of England, Shearer (a dirty player by anybody’s standards and who often led with his elbow) went two consecutive seasons as the player committing the most fouls yet received no cards whatsoever. If memory serves me right it was in the region of 200 fouls without a card. If memory also serves me right, several of those were clear reds for me.
I don’t know if it is funny or if it is to cry but some people just don’t seem to be able to read an article and understand it….
There have been many complaints over recent years on this and other blogs about serial fouling committed on our players by teams, where the same player is targetted by different members of the opposing team.
There is an article in today’s Times by Matthew Syed about the treatment that Zaha has been getting. In the recent game, he was fouled 8 times, if I remember correctly by 6 different players, and it seems that that is not the first time.
Syed calls it cheating and I think he is correct.
About yesterday’s game, for the record, I am a gunner through and through and thought we were lucky to get the draw.
Whilst watching the game one thing that stood out for me was the amount of booing that emanated from the Burnley supporters when certain of our players had the ball. If there was a stat for the fans who boo the most Burnley would surely win hands down.
I can understand that they felt the need to boo David Luis who, when he played for Chelsea accused their team of playing ‘anti football. I get that.
But why was Guendizi subjected to similar booing right from the start of the game. Could it be that the Burnley fans were confusing him with Luis because they have similar hair styles and thus got a bit confused. There is obviously a need for more Specsaver branches in that area of Lancashire.
But what I don’t get is why the need to pick on Saka who was consistently booed from the moment he was hacked down by the Burnley full back and eventually had to go off injured as a result. Maybe one of the Burnley fans could explain their eagerness to boo the lad. How dare he annoy the Burnley fans so much by getting fouled and injured.
Someone writes in, rattles off a bunch of names of Arsenal players and describes them as horrible. No proof of their being horrible is presented. Just an appeal to emotion, “The proof is just to look at them. It is obvious they are horrible.”. And so it goes, an endless appeal to emotion with no proof.
Burnley’s Westwood talking to LoveSportRadio https://www.lovesportradio.com/news/love-sport-exclusives/we-play-common-sense-football-claims-burnley-midfielder/ says:
Part of that quote is a justification for “common sense football”, so it is a little complex. The ball can move much faster than any given player, and also change direction much faster. To execute a high press, a smaller number of players must attempt to steal the ball off a larger number of players. So it isn’t a forgone conclusion that the high press is always or even mostly result in obtaining possession of the ball.
But the other part of that statement, says that we have high quality players. Something which one of you says (emotionally) that “it is just obvious, that they are so horrible”. So, what is it, are they quality players or are they horrible? They can’t be both.
There was a while, when most of the time Arsenal got the first card and most of that time it was Xhaka. And early in the game. Often the card was the first foul that Xhaka was charged with. And you look at the incident, and wonder, “What was the foul?”. There is nothing in the laws of the game, about breathing on another player. More of the time, the carding looked like something that might be persistent infringement. But this is the first few minutes of the game, and his first or second foul of the game. Where is the persistent infringement in that?
This isn’t about Xhaka “obviously” being a horrible player. This is about PGMO tilting the field.
Can’t believe the comments.
A perfectly reasonable article, more about the inconsistences of refereeing than anything else, invokes the following:
“Arsenal commit so many cynical fouls to break up play”
“Leicester have much better tacklers than Arsenal, simple.”
“So I will say them again. If there was a table for feigning injury or falling over Arsenal would be top”
“Stop bloody whining, you were lucky to come away with a draw, so rather then accept the fact you were played off the park you resort to if and but blah blah blah. Sore losers without losing that takes some doing”
So we have the worst foulers, most cynical foulers, who fall all over the place, and feign injury.
Don’t like us much do you?
And it’s US that has to ‘stop bloody whinging’ and are ‘sore losers’. Pot and kettle.
Despite all those insults you’ve thrown at Arsenal, I cannot see a word in that article that suggests Burnley didn’t play well, didn’t at least deserve a draw, or anything that is remotely insulting to Burnley in any way shape or form.
On the previous thread most post match Comments suggest we were disappointed with our own performance. We could of won it early. Could of lost it in the middle. Finished ok. I personally praised how you played and suggested a draw was probably fair, although 2-2 rather than 0-0 would of been a more accurate reflection of the match, but yes, you could of won it, but so could we, if we had taken our early chances.
Before the match I saw very little if anything to suggest we thought we were going to beat you 3 nil, so I don’t know where that came from. Of course someone may of thought that but equally some people would of thought we could lose. To suggest you didn’t have a similar range of predictions from your own fans would be ridiculous. It’s normal and hardly warrants RB’s dig, because of course no Burnley fans have Claret coloured glasses do they.
Untold Arsenal have analysed refereeing statistics for years, over 15 in fact, and has found the statistics regarding fouls to cards to be extremely inconsistent.
The fact is, whether you like it or not, we have been on the wrong end of the fouls to cards ratio more often than not, over that period 15 year period, so to single out 3 current players, that may or may not be ‘poor tacklers’, that’s just your opinion, is hardly an explanation for the same anomalous statistics over such a vast period of time.
As for us being cynical. Of course we make some cynical fouls, as does every single team, and to deny Burnley do would be ridiculous, but we are certainly not that bad. Only the other week following our drubbing by Man City at the Emirates, who on the day were extremely cynical, MOTD praised City for how clever they were and suggested it was a performance we could learn from as we were not cynical enough.
Our own tv channels talking heads, our own post match analyst and our manger, all said we have to learn from City’s ‘Tactical’ (read Cynical) fouling.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-city-tactical-fouls-arsenal-17425127
Not one, unlike you lot, moaned about it. They all accepted it was part of the game.
In conclusion I cant see anything in this article, and very very little in our post match comments, that is insulting or ungracious towards Burnley for their performance yesterday. Quite the opposite.
Our manager has said you played your game in your way, and imposed it on us, and except for those periods at the beginning and ends of the match we were just not good enough. He said we could of won, we could of lost. I see that as a pretty fair and balanced assessment.
Honestly, I fail to see what’s got you all so upset.
Steve Ambler
“Being as unbiased as possible. Do you think Burnley tackled unfairly and dirty against Arsenal yesterday? Were yellow cards given appropriately?
I watched a good game with both sides in the main tackling hard but fairly.
So, as you started this by being critical about Burnley let’s end it on a positive note after an enjoyable game and a fair result.”
Steve, I think that is a very good analysis of the match but even so regarding the first paragraph. I think the cards today were probably pretty fair, but one match is pretty irrelevant in the context of one season, let alone 15+ seasons of statistics, as has been analysed by Untold Arsenal. It’s all on here if you want to find it.
As for the headline, as Tony has already admitted, it was a cynical tactic (well there’s a thing) to attract readers, after all that’s his job and it seems to of worked.
That aside a very fair assessment. Personally I think you probably just shaded it, just, but if we’d sneaked it, given our early dominance, I would of thought that fair enough, but in the end, as you suggest, an Honourable draw it was, in a hard fought match.
mick shelley
“But what I don’t get is why the need to pick on Saka who was consistently booed from the moment he was hacked down by the Burnley full back and eventually had to go off injured as a result”
It’s probably because young Sake was faking it (see bellow) and actually only went off at Half time to do a bit of sight seeing.
From john sutcliffe
“If there was a table for feigning injury or falling over Arsenal would be top.”
From Arteta
“I think in the last 10/15 minutes he (Sake) was carrying his injury. We decided to substitute him because he wasn’t feeling good, so tomorrow we will know how he is.”
As I said, and we are the whingers and bad losers.
I think your hypothesis is wrong. Your suggestion that someone has decided to penalise Arsenal more to affect the result is bizarre. Clutching at straws I suggest.
Your team played well for 20 mins missed sitters and then were outclassed for 60mins. The last 10 were even. Our expected goals was higher than yours
Yesterday’s game
Arsenal tackles 17 Burnley 20
Fouls A 11 B8
Yellows Arsenal 3 Burnley 1 – which wasn’t yellow?
You won the diving contest too!
Suggest you need to look beyond your pet topic to look for answers to your poor performance.
I think everyone from all sides will agree standard of refs and var needs looking at, having refs monitored by themselves is crazy, amount of money involved especially with betting companies involved there needs to be an independent oversight, but I think our biggest mistake is we see football as a sport and expect a level playing field, football is an entertainment industry worried about tv rights sponsorship deals global marketing and that normally means the big six, apart from a fairytail story to keep the narrative interesting
Hi
Cracking game yesterday, I thought, let down only by profligate finishing at both ends.
Anyway, Tony, my comment about our discipline under Dyche was based largely on a consistently low number of cards over several seasons, so to avoid offending you and your readers, I’ll start with a few statistics. Over the last 5 seasons (including this one) we’ve had only 3 players sent off in league games and only one in the last 3 years (plus one – harshly – in the Europa League). Suspensions for totting-up are almost as rare. In the season we won the Championship (15/16) we did so without having a player sent off or suspended – this despite having Joey Barton in the team! I haven’t trawled through every booking because life is too short and you’re not that interested, but trust me, we are always at the lower-end.
Now, your analysis will no doubt lead you to conclude that all referees must therefore be Arsenal-hating Burnley fans. I would respectfully suggest that this is unlikely. Ah but, as one of your previous comments implies, you’re uneducated northerners with no grasp of statistics. Or perhaps we just understand that statistics are nothing without empirical evidence. So, looking at yesterday’s game, you committed 11 fouls to our 8, but ended up with 3x the number of yellow cards – that makes it an “outlier” on your analysis. So tell me, which of the 3 Arsenal cards do you think was unjustified, and/or, which of our players should’ve been booked but weren’t? (I’ll give you Lowton early on, but that was offset by one of yours getting away with a similar foul on McNeil a little while later.)
Before you shout “Statistically insignificant sample size”, I know it isn’t, but unless you’re willing to pay for hundreds of Arsenal games to be independently assessed for blatant – and systematic – l injustices, you’re never going to get anywhere with this. At the moment, you’re making a conspiracy theory to explain an apparent statistical anomaly, when there are other potential explanations – playing styles have been offered up, club “culture” maybe another.
The uncomfortable truth for Arsenal fans is that your team is bang-average at the moment. Maybe you ought to spend more time addressing that fact rather than, like your current manager yesterday, (watering the pitch? In Burnley, in February? Do me a favour, as you say in London) than making implausible excuses for them.
Are not your F/Y ratios flawed ?
Yellow card offences may include handball,unsporting behaviour,dissent,using offensive language,simulation,time-wasting,inappropriate goal celebrations etc as well as foul tackles.
The Lowton foul on Saka deserved a yellow card in my opinion. Tarkowski should have had a yellow card after his first foul on Lacazette. He went on to foul Lacazette 5 times before he eventually got a yellow card for a cynical foul.
In my view the officiating was poor and VAR was non existent but then again it is following some concocted Laws of PGMOL.
The result was fair and Burnley missed an opportunity to win. Sometimes a force greater than the PGMOL decides the flight of the ball.
Teacher addresses a student and asks: “How many kidneys do we have?”
“Four!”, The student responds.
“Four? Haha,”
The teacher was one of those who took pleasure in picking on his students’ mistakes and demoralizing them.
“Bring a bundle of grass, because we have an ass in the room,” the teacher orders a front bencher.
“And for me a coffee!”, the student added.
The teacher was furious and expelled the student from the room.
The student was, by the way, the humorist Aparicio Torelly Aporelly (1895-1971), better known as the “Baron de Itararé”.
On his way out of the classroom, the student still had the audacity to correct the furious teacher:
“You asked me how many kidneys\’ we have. ” \’We have four: two of mine and two of yours. \’We have\’ is an expression used for the plural. Enjoy the grass”.
Life demands much more understanding particularly in the teaching profession. The teacher’s job becomes all the more demanding when they have to deal with some really naughty students, more so if they are smart and brainy.
Anthony
Yes indeed, they may well include such matters, but a count I’ve taken at a small number of matches suggests that the majority are tackles throughout.
Jason, in relation to the comment
Now, your analysis will no doubt lead you to conclude that all referees must therefore be Arsenal-hating Burnley fans
no that is not the case.
It leads me to conclude that something odd is happening, and this feeling is extended by the fact that no other part of the media has ever taken up the issue of these stats. Since we know for sure that PGMO issues instructions on what is to be shown and said by authorised journalists I am suspicious.
Clarent blues 46, you said, “I think your hypothesis is wrong.”
Fair enough – I’m putting forward the data and then wondering about it. But just telling me to look elsewhere doesn’t really help the debate. Better to ponder the data and then think, “what could explain this”
Read more about the baron at – http://www.brazzil.com/pages/p18oct95.htm –
Adolescence is that age wherein the youngster refuses to believe he will become as pathetic as his father.
From where you least expect, that’s from whence nothing comes.
It’s easier to catch a liar than a cripple (Brazilian proverb). Especially if the liar is a cripple!
There is a group of men who believe and state that women don’t think. A false belief. Women think and often very well, especially when orchestrating a plan of action to obtain cash from men who think that they don’t think.
Menace
Yes Lowton could have been booked, but then so should Ozil for a similar foul on McNeil a minute or two before he was cautioned for dissent.
On the subject of VAR, if you recorded the game, just watch Guendizi swinging a full-on punch at Cork just after you clear the ball up-field on about 8 minutes (Mick Shelley – that’s why he was booed – no evidence of him being booed before then). it’s a potential straight red. The on field officials missed it but VAR should have picked it up.
It’s very easy to pick up on instances where you feel hard done by and ignore those where you got away with one, but I guess we’re all guilty of confirmation bias.
Jason: that is why we tend to look at statistics on Untold – and why it is called Untold – because most people don’t. Have a look at the comments here, there is a significant number of people making judgements without the use of statistics, although the article itself is about statistics.
Jason
Thanks for explaining why Guendouzi was booed. Could you please tell us why Saka was booed then?
Mick
It was to do with him letting the ball roll out and then falling down injured, then coming back on again. Fair play, the lad was injured, but I think it was more to do with general frustration at your team’s tendency to fall over at the merest contact rather than anything personal. Contrast that with the behaviour of Cork after he was t**twd by Guendouzi, or Mee when kicked in the face by Ozil. I believe play was held up 7 times altogether, each time for an Arsenal player.
Club culture, again.
Jason
Just because you think it’s a club culture doesn’t make it so. It’s just your opinion which is simply a stereo typical Northern view of us Southern Softies.
We are no worse and no better than every other team.
My opinion is nearly every player and every club know how and when to play the ‘I’m more injured than I actually am card’, or stay on the pitch when they could hobble off. Or stay down when they could get up.
For you to try and take the moral high ground on this is frankly laughable.
Jason
I get it.
Burnley players and their fans are fair minded angels and Arsenal players are play acting sissies. This attitude of course has been instilled in you by your serial moaner of a manager Sean Dyche who of course has never complained in his managerial career.
Wood and Barnes for example are a couple of kindhearted folk who wouldn’t dream of going down easily or putting in a dirty challenge when need be. Don’t make me laugh.
Burnley are just Stoke re-incarnated.
Jason
Re jeering Sake.
“It was to do with him letting the ball roll out and then falling down injured, then coming back on again. Fair play, the lad was injured, but I think it was more to do with general frustration at your team’s tendency to fall over at the merest contact rather than anything personal.”
Really? was it? Because of course you’ve got history with this sort of thing haven’t you, even when they’ve had their leg broken.
Turf moor December 2018
“Liverpool’s hopes of winning silverware this season have suffered a major setback with the news that right-back Joe Gomez broke his left leg during Wednesday night’s 3-1 Premier League victory at Burnley and could be sidelined for up to six weeks.
The England international, who has been a key figure in Liverpool’s defence this season, had to leave the field after just 24 minutes after being first upended by Ashley Westwood and then bundled into the advertising hoardings by a robust sliding challenge from Ben Mee.
Both tackles were sound tracked by a huge roar of appreciation from the home supporters, but Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp was left raging and said referee Stuart Attwell should have given his players more protection.
SOUND TRACKED BY A HUGE ROAR.
S what was it this time? Was it ‘more to do with him screaming in agony and rolling around on the floor’? Is that what got you all uppity about that time?
What a bunch of hypocrites you lot are.
Of course there was a huge roar. Show me a body of football fans which wouldn’t cheer when witnessing a fully committed, perfectly-timed challenge like that – you would too if Granit Xhaka was capable of such. The fact that Gomes broke his leg was unfortunate, but injury is an occupational hazard in football. To suggest that Mee intended to “bundle him into the advertising boards” or that Burnley fans were cheering the fact that he got injured is just plain nonsense. I don’t know where you got that description from, but virtually every impartial pundit who commented agreed it was a fine tackle.
As for Sean Dyche being a “serial moaner”, the only thing he serially moans about is the prevalence of diving and play acting in the Premier League. When you think about it is strange that lots of people, from fans to managers, say they don’t like it, especially when they are on the receiving end, yet nobody seems to want to do anything about it. (Whatever happened to retrospective punishment?)
Could it be that certain influential clubs calculate that they are net beneficiaries of such behaviour?
Hypocrisy indeed.
I do find it interesting that when we bring up a range of statistics that contain some odd data that needs investigating, some people very quickly take the discussion into other areas.
A perfectly timed tackle which injures an opponent, is NOT perfectly timed. It is cheating.
Don’t talk rubbish Gord. How can you possibly know when you make a tackle what the outcome will be? Players get injured all the time. Are you telling me that it’s always the result of malice on the part of an opponent.
Watch it for yourself – Mee only has eyes on the ball.
Jason, if Mee only has eyes for the ball then at Premier League level that is dangerous play, because with that level of talent, and with the speed of the game, the chances of injury are much enhanced, but avoidable, if a player does not look out for the opposition.
It is interesting however, while you feel the need to open with “Don’t talk rubbish”, I manage to put my point to you without such a put down. And it is a shame you do that because it does take the emphasis off the second setence which is interesting. My understanding of training at the PL level is that players are indeed trained to know about outcomes, not least for their own protection. Go in like X, defenders are told, and you’ll damage the opponent, and get a card. Go in like Y and neither of you will get hurt. Players can’t do it all the time, any more than they can score a perfect goal or make a perfect pass all the time, but it is part of the training process.
Jason.
Burnley players.
Never exaggerate an injury.
Never argue with the ref.
Never waste time.
Never use gamesmanship.
Never commit a cynical foul.
Their manager never moans.
Just so I know. Do Burnley do anything wrong. I mean anything at all?