comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Randy Wolters (U1734)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is this the so-called definitive angle?

https://x.com/stehoare/status/1885738208069030021?t=ICGhQksnRm3DmIciDdBD5g&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not going to convince those with faulty brains. They think because it was a soft touch on him then it is less of a foul. Misunderstanding the impact of a soft touch on someone's stride when they are running. With their malfunctioning brains. Identify each of them and organise mass euthanasia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am sure Gakpoo could have run despite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? Have u never been tripped up gt?

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Randy Wolters (U1734)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is this the so-called definitive angle?

https://x.com/stehoare/status/1885738208069030021?t=ICGhQksnRm3DmIciDdBD5g&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not going to convince those with faulty brains. They think because it was a soft touch on him then it is less of a foul. Misunderstanding the impact of a soft touch on someone's stride when they are running. With their malfunctioning brains. Identify each of them and organise mass euthanasia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am sure Gakpoo could have run despite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? Have u never been tripped up gt?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wanted to fall.

I hope someone follows u around everyday tripping u up and when ur on the floor saying u wanted to fall m8 🤣

ok

Cud have stayed on ur feet there lad

comment by Randy Wolters (U1734)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is this the so-called definitive angle?

https://x.com/stehoare/status/1885738208069030021?t=ICGhQksnRm3DmIciDdBD5g&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not going to convince those with faulty brains. They think because it was a soft touch on him then it is less of a foul. Misunderstanding the impact of a soft touch on someone's stride when they are running. With their malfunctioning brains. Identify each of them and organise mass euthanasia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The softness of the touch isn't the issue. I've no doubt that Gakpo's fall was real and "tripping himself up" doesn't come into it for me. But the defender is simply running and doesn't seem to initiate contact. I won't go as far as to say it's definitely not a penalty, but it's an exceptionally generous one, especially if the ref was invited to see that angle and stuck with his original decision.

comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Randy Wolters (U1734)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is this the so-called definitive angle?

https://x.com/stehoare/status/1885738208069030021?t=ICGhQksnRm3DmIciDdBD5g&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not going to convince those with faulty brains. They think because it was a soft touch on him then it is less of a foul. Misunderstanding the impact of a soft touch on someone's stride when they are running. With their malfunctioning brains. Identify each of them and organise mass euthanasia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am sure Gakpoo could have run despite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? Have u never been tripped up gt?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wanted to fall.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah you're a mind reader too now?

comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Randy Wolters (U1734)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is this the so-called definitive angle?

https://x.com/stehoare/status/1885738208069030021?t=ICGhQksnRm3DmIciDdBD5g&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not going to convince those with faulty brains. They think because it was a soft touch on him then it is less of a foul. Misunderstanding the impact of a soft touch on someone's stride when they are running. With their malfunctioning brains. Identify each of them and organise mass euthanasia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The softness of the touch isn't the issue. I've no doubt that Gakpo's fall was real and "tripping himself up" doesn't come into it for me. But the defender is simply running and doesn't seem to initiate contact. I won't go as far as to say it's definitely not a penalty, but it's an exceptionally generous one, especially if the ref was invited to see that angle and stuck with his original decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats not an excuse for me if a players infront of u cuts across u its on u to take care not to make contact from behind. Accidental doesnt come into it.

I'd say this is a decent angle too.

https://x.com/MattRobinson_99/status/1885716764648001561?s=19

I dont think it was a great angle for gakpo either so it was even more clumsy. Just make sure u dont clip him let him have a shot from a wide angle. U could tell from the defenders reaction he didnt protest had a smile too he knew it was silly and a gift but knew there was contact and once given isnt being overturned.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Randy Wolters (U1734)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is this the so-called definitive angle?

https://x.com/stehoare/status/1885738208069030021?t=ICGhQksnRm3DmIciDdBD5g&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not going to convince those with faulty brains. They think because it was a soft touch on him then it is less of a foul. Misunderstanding the impact of a soft touch on someone's stride when they are running. With their malfunctioning brains. Identify each of them and organise mass euthanasia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The softness of the touch isn't the issue. I've no doubt that Gakpo's fall was real and "tripping himself up" doesn't come into it for me. But the defender is simply running and doesn't seem to initiate contact. I won't go as far as to say it's definitely not a penalty, but it's an exceptionally generous one, especially if the ref was invited to see that angle and stuck with his original decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats not an excuse for me if a players infront of u cuts across u its on u to take care not to make contact from behind. Accidental doesnt come into it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Like I say, I'm not saying it wasn't a penalty but I would expect it not to be given more often than not. The merest of touches, and to say it was accidental is an understatement. The only thing he could have done was leap backwards and give Gakpo a clear run on goal.

I think defenders get given too much benefit of doubt, often when they themselves dont even ask for it. The bournemouth lad knew yet people are tring to defend him. He took that risk running behind him close enough to make contact and seemed to accept the outcome. Just hold ur hands up and say look im nowhere near the ball ive caught him from behind it doesnt take much to trip someone its clumsy move on.

Im with u on consistency of refs, bournemouth had one not given vs brentford. But it should have been esp if this one is.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 8 minutes ago
I think defenders get given too much benefit of doubt, often when they themselves dont even ask for it. The bournemouth lad knew yet people are tring to defend him. He took that risk running behind him close enough to make contact and seemed to accept the outcome. Just hold ur hands up and say look im nowhere near the ball ive caught him from behind it doesnt take much to trip someone its clumsy move on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd call it clumsy if he actively tried to play the ball, or got too close and bundled Gakpo over (e.g. that second Spurs one on Cole Palmer the other week). Failing to step back and wave the attacker through isn't clumsy in my view. That the defender's reaction is more convincing than the replays - which it is - is strange indeed.

comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Randy Wolters (U1734)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is this the so-called definitive angle?

https://x.com/stehoare/status/1885738208069030021?t=ICGhQksnRm3DmIciDdBD5g&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not going to convince those with faulty brains. They think because it was a soft touch on him then it is less of a foul. Misunderstanding the impact of a soft touch on someone's stride when they are running. With their malfunctioning brains. Identify each of them and organise mass euthanasia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am sure Gakpoo could have run despite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? Have u never been tripped up gt?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He wanted to fall.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Delusional 😆

comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 8 minutes ago
I think defenders get given too much benefit of doubt, often when they themselves dont even ask for it. The bournemouth lad knew yet people are tring to defend him. He took that risk running behind him close enough to make contact and seemed to accept the outcome. Just hold ur hands up and say look im nowhere near the ball ive caught him from behind it doesnt take much to trip someone its clumsy move on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd call it clumsy if he actively tried to play the ball, or got too close and bundled Gakpo over (e.g. that second Spurs one on Cole Palmer the other week). Failing to step back and wave the attacker through isn't clumsy in my view. That the defender's reaction is more convincing than the replays - which it is - is strange indeed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not hard to make sure ur not directly behind it doesnt cost u too much time or effort either really. If its too late its too late its desperation from there on in. Gakpo was yards ahead of him wasnt getting around him to the ball before he has chance to take a shot so yes its indeed extremely careless clumsy whatever u wanna call it imo.

Don't get me wrong i undestand defenders wants and needs to be as tight as possible. Just a finger to the shirt can put an attacker off, the mere presence of a def being close.. Thats the risk and rewards of it. It was just nice it appeared he took accountability of it.

Excellent! It's laugh at Spurs time soon

We are a joke

Fill your boots

comment by Sheriff JW Pepper (U1007)
posted 1 minute ago
Excellent! It's laugh at Spurs time soon
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think they will get torn up today. Brentford to hit four, two each for Mbeumo and Wissa.

Then they'll probably knock Liverpool out of the cup

Yep, confirmed. They've got some dog shat side out as well

comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Randy Wolters (U1734)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Clockwork Red: Rúben's Train (U4892)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is this the so-called definitive angle?

https://x.com/stehoare/status/1885738208069030021?t=ICGhQksnRm3DmIciDdBD5g&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still not going to convince those with faulty brains. They think because it was a soft touch on him then it is less of a foul. Misunderstanding the impact of a soft touch on someone's stride when they are running. With their malfunctioning brains. Identify each of them and organise mass euthanasia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The softness of the touch isn't the issue. I've no doubt that Gakpo's fall was real and "tripping himself up" doesn't come into it for me. But the defender is simply running and doesn't seem to initiate contact. I won't go as far as to say it's definitely not a penalty, but it's an exceptionally generous one, especially if the ref was invited to see that angle and stuck with his original decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats not an excuse for me if a players infront of u cuts across u its on u to take care not to make contact from behind. Accidental doesnt come into it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Like I say, I'm not saying it wasn't a penalty but I would expect it not to be given more often than not. The merest of touches, and to say it was accidental is an understatement. The only thing he could have done was leap backwards and give Gakpo a clear run on goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Intent doesn't come into it. The player fouled Gakpo in the box causing him to fall over. Whether he meant to do it or not is irrelevant. In fact I'd say most fouls are the box the defender wasn't trying to foul him. Why should Gakpo, about to shoot at goal be put at a disadvantage because the defender didn't intend on fouling him? That makes no sense.

theyre resting vdv and bergvall for the cup game?

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 6 minutes ago
Don't get me wrong i undestand defenders wants and needs to be as tight as possible. Just a finger to the shirt can put an attacker off, the mere presence of a def being close.. Thats the risk and rewards of it. It was just nice it appeared he took accountability of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Exactly, but a finger to the shirt would never, ever be a penalty. This was effectively the same in terms of what the defender did wrong, except it was on the legs, where it's much more likely to cause a fall and thus a penalty. I don't think the defender really could have done his job without trying to close down Gakpo and if the attacker's back leg shaves his sock, I do think it will often be waved away. I can't even call it a "coming together" as they didn't really.

(Again, I'm not disputing the fact that the merest contact is enough to trip Gakpo here. But it really was the merest from what I can see.)

Tottenham bench is scarily bad