The FA cup 16/17

First topic message reminder :

no thread on this seasons so far so thought id start one, be rude not to gloat a little bit at liverpool

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Crimey wrote:That's right I forgot you had a link to my inner thoughts.

Of course I believe that, that's why I said it. I actually enjoy seeing Liverpool playing different sides, seeing fringe players or youngsters getting opportunities to play is one of my favourite things in football. Fair enough lower league teams may be disappointed with that, but as a fan of Liverpool, the FA Cup and League Cups are entertaining for that exact reason. I also don't think it necessarily means not taking it seriously, the whole squad should be competitive and capable of beating lower league sides.

I do however know that you'll say anything and everything to defend Liverpool against any sort of criticism, you don't believe what you're saying at all and I doubt you ever really do.

You're honestly that arrogant that you believe you have a better grasp of what I believe than I myself?

I prefer it when other teams play their weakened sides as well, it means when watching those games I get to see different players play. I'm not defending getting knocked out of the competition I'm just saying that sometimes people can enjoy football for different reasons and one of the things I like about those competitions is seeing different players playing than we see week in, week out over the Premier League. 

I'm not sure it's even defending criticism, I'm just saying that I like it, I understand why others wouldn't, particularly the fans of lower league clubs who may be disappointed when they don't face the "real" big teams, but as a Liverpool fan it doesn't bother me.

Now if we were up against Chelsea in the second round, or it was the semi-final of the competition, my desire to win the competition would overrule the fun of seeing different players, but we were up against Wolves and the team put out was more than capable of beating them. Saying it was a weakened side would be more of a defence of Liverpool, the team and tactics just weren't good enough, that's why we got knocked out.

Also I'm not sure when this supposed ruining of the FA Cup happened as literally for my entire life teams have played "weakened" sides in the domestic cups. I can't remember this mythical time when everybody played their first teams. Perhaps it happened before my time, but in which case the FA Cup has been dead for a long time from that perspective if that's it's only value.

Wayne Shaw is now being investigated by the FA as a betting company had odds of 8/1 on him eating a pie on the bench!

Apparantly a few of the players had a bet on this. Dozy tit!

Scott is Back wrote:Wayne Shaw is now being investigated by the FA as a betting company had odds of 8/1 on him eating a pie on the bench!

Apparantly a few of the players had a bet on this. Dozy tit!

It was hardly dignified and not a great advertisement for being fit but what Shaw scoffs on the bench should really be a matter for him and Sutton's management. If a few bookies have been caught out, I'm not going to shed any tears for them.

There's far too much hypocrisy from the football authorities when it comes to gambling. A 23 stone 'roly poly goalie' having a bit of fun on a Monday night and apparently earning some of his mates and team's supporters a few bob on the way has the FA up in arms. However, it seems perfectly fine for several leading managers to advertise particular betting sites and for teams to be sponsored by them.

guildfordbat wrote:

Scott is Back wrote:Wayne Shaw is now being investigated by the FA as a betting company had odds of 8/1 on him eating a pie on the bench!

Apparantly a few of the players had a bet on this. Dozy tit!

It was hardly dignified and not a great advertisement for being fit but what Shaw scoffs on the bench should really be a matter for him and Sutton's management. If a few bookies have been caught out, I'm not going to shed any tears for them.

There's far too much hypocrisy from the football authorities when it comes to gambling. A 23 stone 'roly poly goalie' having a bit of fun on a Monday night and apparently earning some of his mates and team's supporters a few bob on the way has the FA up in arms. However, it seems perfectly fine for several leading managers to advertise particular betting sites and for teams to be sponsored by them.

I agree with everything your saying, but just seems a shame that this is likely what Sutton's run in the cup will now be remembered for. Yeah its a bit of fun, but should he be achieving fame for being overweight, basically Onslow in a keeper top, more so than some of the players that worked there backside off to get to the 5th round?

Scott is Back wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

Scott is Back wrote:Wayne Shaw is now being investigated by the FA as a betting company had odds of 8/1 on him eating a pie on the bench!

Apparantly a few of the players had a bet on this. Dozy tit!

It was hardly dignified and not a great advertisement for being fit but what Shaw scoffs on the bench should really be a matter for him and Sutton's management. If a few bookies have been caught out, I'm not going to shed any tears for them.

There's far too much hypocrisy from the football authorities when it comes to gambling. A 23 stone 'roly poly goalie' having a bit of fun on a Monday night and apparently earning some of his mates and team's supporters a few bob on the way has the FA up in arms. However, it seems perfectly fine for several leading managers to advertise particular betting sites and for teams to be sponsored by them.

I agree with everything your saying, but just seems a shame that this is likely what Sutton's run in the cup will now be remembered for. Yeah its a bit of fun, but should he be achieving fame for being overweight, basically Onslow in a keeper top,  more so than some of the players that worked there backside off to get to the 5th round?

Had to think for a moment there ... but very good.

Needs more Mrs Bucket that statement

Shaw has resigned from Sutton.

While I see the conflict it seems a vast overreaction and it's odd that this is where football takes a stand

guildfordbat wrote:

Scott is Back wrote:Wayne Shaw is now being investigated by the FA as a betting company had odds of 8/1 on him eating a pie on the bench!

Apparantly a few of the players had a bet on this. Dozy tit!

It was hardly dignified and not a great advertisement for being fit but what Shaw scoffs on the bench should really be a matter for him and Sutton's management. If a few bookies have been caught out, I'm not going to shed any tears for them.

There's far too much hypocrisy from the football authorities when it comes to gambling. A 23 stone 'roly poly goalie' having a bit of fun on a Monday night and apparently earning some of his mates and team's supporters a few bob on the way has the FA up in arms. However, it seems perfectly fine for several leading managers to advertise particular betting sites and for teams to be sponsored by them.

The problem is that he admitted he knew there was odds on It, which it shouldn't be too hard to work out why that's not on.

One for the gambling commission to work out

GSC wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

Scott is Back wrote:Wayne Shaw is now being investigated by the FA as a betting company had odds of 8/1 on him eating a pie on the bench!

Apparantly a few of the players had a bet on this. Dozy tit!

It was hardly dignified and not a great advertisement for being fit but what Shaw scoffs on the bench should really be a matter for him and Sutton's management. If a few bookies have been caught out, I'm not going to shed any tears for them.

There's far too much hypocrisy from the football authorities when it comes to gambling. A 23 stone 'roly poly goalie' having a bit of fun on a Monday night and apparently earning some of his mates and team's supporters a few bob on the way has the FA up in arms. However, it seems perfectly fine for several leading managers to advertise particular betting sites and for teams to be sponsored by them.

The problem is that he admitted he knew there was odds on It, which it shouldn't be too hard to work out why that's not on.

One for the gambling commission to work out

Ok, so he knew there was odds on it, so what if he doesn't eat the pie, is that not influencing the odds?

Was not eating a pie able to be bet on?

I think sacking him for what was a bit of fun and some bookie bashing in the locker room most likely is probably a bit harsh, but you can't deny the conflict there

The punishment should fit the crime but that doesn't make it not a crime essentially.

I have found the indignation about Sutton cashing-in to be disgusting. People who funnel all their cash into the Sky big league product have then decided a club that will use any extra money to survive and prosper in the community is almost a disgrace.

This betting stuff: wasn't a football related bet, doesn't impact the game, is basically advertisement. Think the FA have shown why there is no confidence in them at very high levels

I mean I think they paid out a 5 figure sum so somebody's bet over a grand on a fat guy eating a pie. Not hard to connect the dots there.

He wasn't sacked, he resigned.

Ultimately, the bookies have to be held responsible to a point. If people are gonna ask for a stupid bet, why publicise it? The amount of money the bookies make from people is obscene, more fool them.

It was Sun Bet who paid the 5 figure sum out and they sponsored Sutton for the match.

Yeah it looks very grubby all round to be honest. I would imagine in reality he was pushed more than he jumped.

Yea, looks like they asked him to resign.

The condemnation online about how Sutton have cheapened the cup.

For Sutton and that club they have to rinse as much as they can from it - their future can be secured, and brightened/improved; screw the crying from people who hadn't been to a non-league game in years. They wont be there when this money benefits that club

Rinse it for all it's worth, people are talking about the FA cup again because of them and Lincoln.

As for the betting scandal, it's pathetic that it was a bet in the first place and seeing as it wasn't sporting related I don't think Shaw has a case to answer.

And if the bookies are stupid enough to offer that bet, and a few people benefit off it, then more fool them. Everyone who won off that bet should thank Wayne Shaw!

Beer wrote:And if the bookies are stupid enough to offer that bet, and a few people benefit off it, then more fool them. Everyone who won off that bet should thank Wayne Shaw!

And await their impending investigation from the FA and the gambling commission.

Obesity isn't amusing, speaks volumes about modern society and social media that this guy got any air time.

Just shown he's an idiot and landed himself, his club and his friends in hot water with his stunt.

Beer wrote:And if the bookies are stupid enough to offer that bet, and a few people benefit off it, then more fool them. Everyone who won off that bet should thank Wayne Shaw!

They've had headline news in the majority of national media essentially for free - they are not stupid in any way.

As for Liverpool - they've only won 1 trophy in the last decade, should be playing proper teams in the cups. They have their own channel and reserve games are cheap to attend if you want to see the new breed of player coming through.

You can't investigate punters like that (it isn't insider trading), he isn't obese, he's just made him selves thousands of pounds so isn't an idiot.

I'm sure he'll make a decent amount of money from this.

Ent wrote:

Beer wrote:And if the bookies are stupid enough to offer that bet, and a few people benefit off it, then more fool them. Everyone who won off that bet should thank Wayne Shaw!

And await their impending investigation from the FA and the gambling commission.

Obesity isn't amusing, speaks volumes about modern society and social media that this guy got any air time.

Just shown he's an idiot and landed himself, his club and his friends in hot water with his stunt.

Beer wrote:And if the bookies are stupid enough to offer that bet, and a few people benefit off it, then more fool them. Everyone who won off that bet should thank Wayne Shaw!

They've had headline news in the majority of national media essentially for free - they are not stupid in any way.

As for Liverpool - they've only won 1 trophy in the last decade, should be playing proper teams in the cups. They have their own channel and reserve games are cheap to attend if you want to see the new breed of player coming through.

Quite a narrow minded view there.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:You can't investigate punters like that (it isn't insider trading), he isn't obese, he's just made him selves thousands of pounds so isn't an idiot.

He's reported to be 23 stone, unless he's 7ft2 he's obese - in fact if he is 6ft2 he'd be morbidly obese.

I think anyone can be investigated and charged under the gambling act if they deliberately directly influence the outcome of a bet, but i'm not a legal eagle so will have to see.

He is an idiot - he got caught up in his 15 minutes and got himself, his friends and his club investigated by the FA and gambling commission. Also had to resign from his post at the club. Making a few quid off it (which he might have to give back/lose) doesn't change the fact he has behaved like an imbecile.

Chelsea rent boys getting the referees favours as per usual. Michael Oliver is a coward of an official

Eh. Possibly light, but pretty thick by Herrera

Great finish, but had been coming. United completely penned in.

Rashford has to finish that.

Chelsea are toying with United now

1-0 Chelsea. Routine after the red card

Chelsea - Spurs
Arsenal - Citeh

Conte said at the post match conference in regards to Hazard "The referee must protect these type of players. When they go out with a bad injury..."It's very dangerous to receive a kick from the back."

My opinion on certain players being protected and I'm talking in general but I'm sure it covers Hazard also. When players stop diving and grabbing their heads after being tackled, stop trying to con the ref and stop waving imaginary red cards to get rival players sent off, then I would agree that certain players should be protected. Until then, deal with it.

last i checked football was still a contact game, the game is already becoming so slow and stop start and boring to watch with players rolling round on the floor more than actually playing. need to clamp down on over egging contact, should bring in a rule where if the contact is so minimum that the player could easily continue then its no foul. also bring in bans for players who go down under no contact at all. getting turned off football more and more these days, doesn't help when watching a proper sporting competition like six nations currently.

Eh. When clearly the gameplan is just to foul the opposition's best attacking talent, as United's was on Hazard yesterday, I'm glad the ref put a halt to it. Hacking down the biggest threat ain't football.

Ander Herrera had it coming, referee's are probably sick of him. To get an early sending off seemed harsh but I think there would have been no complaints if those incidents had come in different games and each got a yellow card. He was pushing his luck.

It's a contact game in that you shouldn't be punished for making contact when doing something that's part of the game, but both of them were cynical fouls. Soft, yes, but cynical attempts.

I don't see how Herrera can have any complaints - it was a ridiculous thing to do just after Oliver had warned Jones and smalling - a little soft maybe, but I think it's a red.

I didn't get bringing on fellaini and taking off henrikh tbh - just took away literally any counter attacking threat bar rashford pouncing on a Luiz error

Is there anywhere in the rules that states that if Player A has been kicking Player B enough to get a final warning that if then Player C makes a slight foul that it then deserves a yellow?

You can get a yellow for persistent fouling no?

It was clearly a team wide effort and they paid the price for it

He wasn't persistent though. Other players had been.
As I said previously, does it state in the rules of the games that fouls from other players can then roll over to another player?
You all may say 'oh he deserved it' etc, but if it's not in the rules of the game then no he didn't actually deserve it.

herrera made two "fouls", got a yellow card for each. he barely even touched hazard for second who threw himself to the ground, never a yellow and was much worse fouls all game that the ref didnt give yellows for. costa for instance went in late on herrera was much worse who then should have been sent off later

persistent fouling was always from one player not shared around between a team.

As Olly says, given it was just after a warning to United for persistent fouling (especially on Hazard) it was an incredibly stupid thing to do by Herrera. I did feel it was a little soft, but Jones should certainly have been booked for at least one of the (three?) times he hacked Hazard down prior to that. Ironically, had he been so Herrera might well have got away with it.

I have no problem with refs giving out a "team yellow" like that, particularly if they've just warned the players. Happens in rugby and think it's a good rule, stops teams coming with just an intent to foul as much as possible, which was United's intent on Hazard yesterday.

Thought the commentators were a bit over the top with Rashford at times yesterday. Some very nice touches, but really should have taken that chance. Also some of the praise of Kante got a bit silly at times, fine player though he is.

Intriguing semi-final. Am I right in saying Spurs are the only team to beat Chelsea since the switch to a back three? Certainly the team that's made them look the most ordinary. Will be interesting to see if they can do so again.

If they're part of the rules in rugby then good, they're not though in football so a ref shouldn't then decide to give one out.
If he's going down that route then he should have sin binned a few players instead last night.

I don't really get the complaints about warnings etc.

Every week in every league someone gets turned and trips the player and gets booked so i don't see what's the problem tbh.

"We have to be positive, the players were phenomenal but Pogba was by far the best player on the pitch," Mourinho said after the game.

"He was a giant on the pitch. After him, all my other boys were fantastic."

Above is a quote from Mourinho about last nights game. Interesting opinion....

Would hope he meant out of the United team, and even then I wouldn't agree..

First off, I didn't see the game although that's not normally a barrier to comments on here.  However, I have read the match reports and it's clear from those that referee Oliver spoke to United's captain Smalling after Jones fouled Hazard and just before Herrera got his second yellow.

Smalling being spoken to was effectively a group warning and it was then down to the United skipper to ensure all his team took notice of it. Herrera didn't. Can't see that the ref is at fault at all for what followed.

Herrera made no attempt to get the ball.

Bad interesing that we see no call for protection now it's United fouling players. It was a big issue when Ronaldo was here

protection from what brushing hazards chest? while he goes down clutching his face in agony. our tactics were to close down and press hazard at all times, fairly basic seeing though he's chelseas best player. these saying we were trying to boot him off the pitch are talking rubbish, there was bairly a bad challenge in the game, the worse being costas. we were niggling him at worse, certainly no chopper harris tactics like some are suggesting. dont be bought by hazards falling over like hes been pole axed. unfortunately for us the ref bought everything he was selling. if herreras two fouls were yellows theyd be couple reds in every game at least. worse tackles like others have said werent punished though

First one was pretty clearly a yellow, not even subtle.

2nd one was for a volume of cynical fouls on Hazard that made no attempt to get the ball rather than just stopping him generating any momentum.

Unfortunate perhaps, thick definitely.

Apparently persistent fouling can be applied to an entire team fouling a player and the yellow is classified as unsporting behaviour.

Regardless Smalling as captain was clearly warned by the ref that he was done warning United, 30 seconds later Herrera fouls him again. Hazard fouled twice more in the resulting 55 minutes. Clearly it worked.