The Barclays Premier League Thread 2013/14

[Naitch]

Today is a wonderful day.

To anyone who thinks Chelsea aren't about entertaining the fans...I think you need to check the footage of the Chelsea fans again, because we for sure were going fucking mental.

I haven't even been a devout Chelsea fan for several seasons now and I'm over the moon after this game.

[Kaney]

Agree to disagree then. Saying the team that play the best football don't deserve to win is just silly to me.

Football is about attack AND defence, last time I checked.

Try telling that to Wenger

[Hobo]

There certainly was a lot of them defending!

It was a disappointing result. I don't think Liverpool played too badly. Even Aspas played ok (bar his two flubs) The defensive set up was tactically spot on for limiting Liverpool's space for attacks. I feel like it was a mistake to allow everything to turn into setting up Gerrard for a shot and to go all out for it at the end.

Anyway, Palace are next up.

[Crybaby Bunting]

Dear me, I haven't heard Liverpool fans act like such Manchester United fans in such a long time. The other team should attack and expose themselves? No! The other team should focus on winning.

They're acting like Chelsea has nothing to play for in the league so shouldn't have gone out of their way to beat Liverpool.

[brenchill]

I heard probably the worst football phone-in ever earlier on TalkSport. Some idiot Liverpool fan called in and seriously demanded Rodgers be sacked after today's result and said if they hadn't have sold Jonjo Shelvey, he would have made all the difference today they would have beaten Chelsea and won the league.

[Gazz]

I heard probably the worst football phone-in ever earlier on TalkSport. Some idiot Liverpool fan called in and seriously demanded Rodgers be sacked after today's result and said if they hadn't have sold Jonjo Shelvey, he would have made all the difference today they would have beaten Chelsea and won the league.

Did he have a Mancunian accent?

[Rich]

[Hobo]

Seems like a learned man.

[Kaney]

Dear me, I haven't heard Liverpool fans act like such Manchester United fans in such a long time. The other team should attack and expose themselves? No! The other team should focus on winning.

They're acting like Chelsea has nothing to play for in the league so shouldn't have gone out of their way to beat Liverpool.

I was the one saying they should be attacking o.0

Although it was Mourinho who said they haven't anything left to play for and wasn't focusing on the league anymore so I don't get how that's liverpools fault :/

[Crybaby Bunting]

Oh come off it, if any of you honestly thought Mourinho was going to throw the game when they could still mathematically win the league then I've got a lovely bridge to sell you.

[Rich]

Is it Stamford Bridge?

[SeanDMan]

I seem to always fall in love with the underdog. I've realized that I actually do support a team and always care if they win. That team is Swansea!

why are Swans. :/

[Colly]

So the dive would go unpunished? What if I hacked down 7 players cynically but the opposition team still had an advantage after each, would I still just get the one booking?

Then you'd get a red card for a violent conduct.

Not if none of the fouls fit the violent conduct criteria. Which they don't.

Surely your behaviour would fit the Violent Conduct criteria?

Nope. You lot are rubbish at hypotheticals.

[Crybaby Bunting]

Hypothetically if it was a challenge worthy of a straight red card, play would have to be stopped even if the opposition striker was facing an empty net with nobody around him.

[Gazz]

You said 'cynically'.

A cynical foul is violent conduct.

If a player committed a foul worthy of a yellow but an advantage was played, if the player then committed another foul worthy of a yellow before play stopped and the ref had chance to give the first yellow, then the ref is well within the law to book the player twice and send him off.

Hypothetically if it was a challenge worthy of a straight red card, play would have to be stopped even if the opposition striker was facing an empty net with nobody around him.

No it wouldn't. The ref can play an advantage of five seconds, which would be enough time to score.

[Kaney]

Oh come off it, if any of you honestly thought Mourinho was going to throw the game when they could still mathematically win the league then I've got a lovely bridge to sell you.

I don't recall anyone saying they expected him to throw the game. All I've seen are people calling him a smarmy cunt. Which he is. Just cos his mind games worked doesn't mean I have to like it.

[Baddar]

You said 'cynically'.

A cynical foul is violent conduct.

If a player committed a foul worthy of a yellow but an advantage was played, if the player then committed another foul worthy of a yellow before play stopped and the ref had chance to give the first yellow, then the ref is well within the law to book the player twice and send him off.

Hypothetically if it was a challenge worthy of a straight red card, play would have to be stopped even if the opposition striker was facing an empty net with nobody around him.

No it wouldn't. The ref can play an advantage of five seconds, which would be enough time to score.

Booooring. Shit argument.

[Gazz]

Baddar is shown a red card for foul and abusive language and is banned for a day.

[Colly]

A foul isn't violent conduct according to FIFA. To clarify, my 7 fouls are all yellow worthy...

I'm just trying to find out if you can two yellows (and therefore a red) in one passage of play.

[Gazz]

Yes

Baddar is also found guilty of ungentlemanly conduct on the basis of being Welsh and is banned forever.