• Manchester United Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • Ms. Jack Jacob Baldy Dodge VD Ms. Jack Jacob Baldy Dodge VD May 7, 2013 07:29 Flag

    The 'TACKLE FROM BEHIND'....

     

    This is getting to be like a Monty Python sketch!

    This from the midget on the Arsenal board ...

    "A 'tackle from behind' IS a FOUL no matter what, you idiot!!!"

    .... and today ...

    "the 'tackle from behind' is NOT illegal"

    ..............................

    Now to the other thread, which I can no longer reply to.

    Me: You claimed that as long as the tackler gets the ball first it can't be a penalty .... that's WRONG!

    Midget: I never did claim that though did I Rikki?

    Midget: I mean, I claimed Sagna got to the ball first, which he did, and therefore did NOT foul.

    Can you believe that?? In one sentence he claimed he didn't say it, then he goes and repeats it in the next sentence!!

    "Sagna got to the ball first, which he did, and therefore did NOT foul."
    What can that possibly mean apart from it cannot be a foul if he got the ball first???

    You really are thicker than thick, there should be a new word just to describe you!

    This topic is deleted.
    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Oh Rikki Rikki OAP Thick Rikki, do I really have to explain EVERY little detail?

      Can you NOT possibly THINK for yourself????

      Sagna, got to the ball FIRST as stated, the reason this is so IMPORTANT in this particular incident is because the manner in which Sagna tackled Van Persie was PERFECTLY LEGAL, when one is in the knowledge that he touched the ball FIRST!!!

      WHY, I hear that DENSE excuse for a brain ask!?!?!

      Sagna never went through RVP, he did not tackle dangerously, he did not scythe the guy down, HE PLAYED THE BALL!!!

      The tackle was NOT malicious FFS!!!

      Your lame and frankly HILARIOUS post on the Arsenal board......

      'So regardless of who touches the ball and when, the tackle can still be declared careless, reckless or using excessive force.

      This was the case with Sagna's tackle on RVP, the ref was unsighted, therefore had no idea who touched the ball, he quite clearly gave the penalty for the tackle itself.'

      He gave the penalty because of the evidence before him Rikki.

      FACT is, what with Sagna touching the ball, the referee did not have ALL the evidence did he?

      His decision was PROVEN INCORRECT FFS because others DID have the benefit of ALL the EVIDENCE!!! It's not rocket science Rikki!!!

      Just because the incident was not seen at the time does NOT mean it didn't happen does it you fool!?!?!

      DOH! DOH!! DOH!!!

      Crikey if the whole world went by your 'logic' all would be lost! I mean, what about Lampards goal in the World cup? You know the one that went ACRES over the line yet was not given by the ref!?!?

      Did the ref in that case make the correct decision Rikki!?!?!?

      Take your time old man!!!

      Hell......get Steve to help you with it!!!!

      ROTFLMHAIRYAO@TWEEDLEDUMBANDTWEEDLEDUMBER

    • I never commented on the legality of any tackle. I commented that your evidence meant the referee made a perfectly honest and justifiable call for the penalty. I know you struggle , its because you are stupid

      • 1 Reply to Steve
      • Oh dear, the self proclaimed 'Brain of Britain' tries sticking his oar in again...

        'I commented that your evidence meant the referee made a perfectly honest and justifiable call for the penalty'

        Hmmm....I never doubted that he did make a 'perfectly honest and justifiable call', fact is, the call was WRONG!!! DOH!!!

        Try banging that lofty brain of yours on a wall Steve, that may just shift it onto the plain on which you mistakenly believe it is operating on.

        Much love