| Diving apologists 12:59 - Oct 21 with 3356 views | Jonathans_coat |
In the words of Darran "f**k my eyes"
Why are people defending Moses and berating Monk? Just bizarre! Even in Stokes own defence of Moses issued by assistant manager Mark Bowen, they admit he dived an that it wasn't a penalty!
"Is Moses trying to make the best of a situation? Yes. Was it harsh on Swansea? Yes. Was the decision a poor one? Possibly yes." (Mark Bowen)
So in other words Moses cheated the ref into giving a penalty, correct?
Garry Monk gave his honest opinion to a reporter on the subject, in which he correctly states that Moses dived and cheated the ref into giving a penalty, and is threatened with legal action and criticised by many on this board for being naive and unprofessional! What for? Giving an honest opinion and correctly interpreting the events that took place?
I think this cringeworthy defence of Moses because (a) everybody does it, it's part of he modern game. (b) there was tiny contact/shirt pull, and he was running at pace, is completely pathetic as football is a contact sport and none of this excuses flopping to the floor like a fish to cheat the ref into giving a penalty! That's like saying because there was very minimal "contact" between Andy Carrolls elbow and Chicos head/hair, he was correct to leap to the floor and roll around like a bad amateur dramatic society member! And the difference between Stoke and Swansea is we did not defend Chico's bulls**t, we were duly embarrassed and quietly reprimanded him, dropped him for the next game, and didn't come out with a pathetic defence of our player, while quietly patting him on the back behind closed doors for winning them a crucial penalty.
This behaviour is ruining football, and defending it frankly inexplicable! Unless of course it fits into some pre-held anti-monk agenda. |  | | |  |
| Diving apologists on 13:02 - Oct 21 with 3325 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I think he made the most of it but Rangel fouled him inside the box.
If that happened to us we'd think it was a penalty.
Gomez and Chico would go down over far less and few batted an eyelid. |  |
| |
| Diving apologists on 13:05 - Oct 21 with 3312 views | Tom1912 |
| Diving apologists on 13:02 - Oct 21 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I think he made the most of it but Rangel fouled him inside the box.
If that happened to us we'd think it was a penalty.
Gomez and Chico would go down over far less and few batted an eyelid. |
If you think that's a penalty you are turning football into a non-contact sport.
Contact does not equal a foul.
Also, many people, including myself, criticised Gomez and Chico for their antics. |  | | |
| Diving apologists on 13:05 - Oct 21 with 3311 views | scottishjack |
Nope, you're right, I don't understand it either, for me diving is one of the biggest problems in football right now.
As for Monk, he has said things in the heat of the moment that perhaps he shouldn't have, the word "cheat" seems to have upset a few, but he will hopefully learn to go through the proper channels from now on. |  | | |
| Diving apologists on 13:09 - Oct 21 with 3280 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
| Diving apologists on 13:05 - Oct 21 by Tom1912 |
If you think that's a penalty you are turning football into a non-contact sport.
Contact does not equal a foul.
Also, many people, including myself, criticised Gomez and Chico for their antics. |
Grabbing an opponents shirt after they have gone past you is a foul. | |
| |
| Diving apologists on 13:14 - Oct 21 with 3262 views | dameedna |
| Diving apologists on 13:09 - Oct 21 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
Grabbing an opponents shirt after they have gone past you is a foul. |
Only if it impedes the player [Post edited 21 Oct 2014 13:15]
|  | | |
| Diving apologists on 13:14 - Oct 21 with 3259 views | Tom1912 |
| Diving apologists on 13:09 - Oct 21 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
Grabbing an opponents shirt after they have gone past you is a foul. |
Only if you impede them, which Rangel didn't do. | | | |
| Diving apologists on 13:16 - Oct 21 with 3252 views | dameedna |
| Diving apologists on 13:14 - Oct 21 by Tom1912 |
Only if you impede them, which Rangel didn't do. |
late mate | | | |
| Diving apologists on 13:17 - Oct 21 with 3233 views | Tom1912 |
| Diving apologists on 13:16 - Oct 21 by dameedna |
late mate |
I would have been first if my internet hadn't taken so long to reply!  | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Diving apologists on 13:21 - Oct 21 with 3218 views | _ |
That isn't an admission of a dive and certainly not a recognition that their player is a cheat. A massive difference.
"Making the best of a situation" just basically means there was a situation there in the first place to make best of ie the fist full of shirt Rangel had of him. Was it a poor decision - "possibly"! Not definitely.
And the game you mentioned when Chico was dropped was West Brom home which we went on to let a lead slip away with them scoring twice.
Yeah, great that... looking nervously over our shoulders we were by being the moral bastions of all things fair in football.
Controversy is what makes football the beautifully random excitement it is... Get over yourself and fack my eyes too. |  |
| |
| Diving apologists on 13:28 - Oct 21 with 3197 views | LeonisGod |
| Diving apologists on 13:21 - Oct 21 by _ |
That isn't an admission of a dive and certainly not a recognition that their player is a cheat. A massive difference.
"Making the best of a situation" just basically means there was a situation there in the first place to make best of ie the fist full of shirt Rangel had of him. Was it a poor decision - "possibly"! Not definitely.
And the game you mentioned when Chico was dropped was West Brom home which we went on to let a lead slip away with them scoring twice.
Yeah, great that... looking nervously over our shoulders we were by being the moral bastions of all things fair in football.
Controversy is what makes football the beautifully random excitement it is... Get over yourself and fack my eyes too. |
Of course it's an admission of a dive  . That's as close as you'd ever get and a complete u-turn from their position at the weekend. The whole world saw him throw himself to the ground without being impeded = dive, simulation. |  | | |
| Diving apologists on 13:40 - Oct 21 with 3177 views | JackFish |
It's because some people, for whatever reason, have decided that they don't like Garry Monk, and anything they can use as a stick to beat him with they will use. Even if said stick is calling a spade a spade. |  | | |
| Diving apologists on 13:42 - Oct 21 with 3173 views | Jonathans_coat |
Yes! Get in there! DYSS and T2C both disagree with me! What do I win, there must be some sort of prize!.......... No wait, it's a thread on planet swans and they both have a contradictory and controversial opinion, no one could have possibly predicted this outcome!
Seriously tho guys, discussing different opinions are the point of this site, and if everyone agreed it would be irrelevant! Still think he dived, which is cheating, and Monk just told the truth though. | | | |
| Diving apologists on 14:42 - Oct 21 with 3099 views | Spratty |
It was more than a tiny contact deliberately reached out and grabbed his shirt and and pulled it down and back, before he went down and as he fell to his knees - clear deliberate impediment - otherwise why do it. I made it clear Moses made the most of it.
But it is accepted that players go down when impeded, hell they are criticised by the pundits for not going down. So why this match and why such an abusive attack against an individual on national media - even bringing his family into it.
If it is an honest opinion why base it on a lie. Why not say Rangel grabbed his shirt and pulled on him but he went down deliberately for it, so it was a dive. Obviously this is impossible to prove and why you should not be pulling back on an attacker's shirts when they are surging forward in the box in control of the ball.
Do I care that Rangel did that - no
Would I care if Rangel got away with it and stopped the threat - no
Would I care if they did that to us and got away with it - yes
Would I care if they did that and then ripped our player apart on national media - you bet
Do I care that another person is being vilified including swearing and bringing their family into it when we are lying and saying there was no contact (it would have been shocking if that was the case - but he was doing what is done over and over again by players and is expected) .
If we want to change that admirable but not by going on a rant about a single player based on a lie because we are angry about losing and our own performance and tactics.
And JackFish if I had it in for Monk. I would not have remained supportive through the entire match and merely said onward and upward after it.
I would have been on here slagging his tactics and the second half performance off at length. It is Monk who liked to slag others off and yes I do not like that and think he appears full of himself much of the time. I am sure he doesn't need me to point out how he criticised Sousa's methods including the could not maintain second halves criticism.
But I promise if any of our managers had behaved like that whittered on about how wonderful their morals were whilst abusively ranting about people based on a lie I would have thought that an embarrassment to our club and totally unfair in exactly the same way. |  | | |
| Diving apologists on 14:49 - Oct 21 with 3069 views | premierjack |
| Diving apologists on 13:02 - Oct 21 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I think he made the most of it but Rangel fouled him inside the box.
If that happened to us we'd think it was a penalty.
Gomez and Chico would go down over far less and few batted an eyelid. |
What a load if rubbish!!! Rangel did not foul Moses. If you think that is a foul you know even less than I thought you did!!
Shocking | | | |
| Diving apologists on 15:05 - Oct 21 with 3029 views | union_jack |
| Diving apologists on 13:02 - Oct 21 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I think he made the most of it but Rangel fouled him inside the box.
If that happened to us we'd think it was a penalty.
Gomez and Chico would go down over far less and few batted an eyelid. |
Absolute bull**** on just about every point you make! |  |
| |
| Diving apologists on 20:31 - Oct 21 with 2889 views | JethroJack |
| Diving apologists on 13:02 - Oct 21 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I think he made the most of it but Rangel fouled him inside the box.
If that happened to us we'd think it was a penalty.
Gomez and Chico would go down over far less and few batted an eyelid. |
Now we know why Garry didn't get on with and got rid of Chico the cheat |  | | |
| Diving apologists on 20:34 - Oct 21 with 2872 views | DwightYorkeSuperstar |
| Diving apologists on 20:31 - Oct 21 by JethroJack |
Now we know why Garry didn't get on with and got rid of Chico the cheat |
Another example of Garry getting rid of a first team player and it backfiring spectacularly.
On current evidence he was a far superior partner to Ash than Fernando. | |
| |
| Diving apologists on 20:36 - Oct 21 with 2864 views | Uxbridge |
Moses cheated. Course he did. Surely that's not up for debate.
If this is the kick for retrospective action to be taken against cheaters then I'm all for it. Not that I think this was anything to do with Monk's rant though. |  |
| |
| Diving apologists on 20:43 - Oct 21 with 2839 views | jackal |
| Diving apologists on 13:02 - Oct 21 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
I think he made the most of it but Rangel fouled him inside the box.
If that happened to us we'd think it was a penalty.
Gomez and Chico would go down over far less and few batted an eyelid. |
If you think that that was a penalty, you are truly clueless. Never a pen. All the pundits said so, all the commentators said so and even the Stoke management said so. |  | | |
| Diving apologists on 20:49 - Oct 21 with 2822 views | JethroJack |
| Diving apologists on 20:34 - Oct 21 by DwightYorkeSuperstar |
Another example of Garry getting rid of a first team player and it backfiring spectacularly.
On current evidence he was a far superior partner to Ash than Fernando. |
I'll indulge you for once.....so, you condone Chico's embarrassing antics & cheating and think he's a better defender than Argentina's centre back Fernandez? Utter bollox.
If getting rid of Chico is another example of Garry "backfiring' what other examples do you have where we're missing certain players that Garry offloaded? Not Michu for Siggy, surely?
Thing is with you, when those players that Garry got rid of were still here, you criticised them as well.....you only praise them after they leave, you silly transparent fool | | | |
| Diving apologists on 20:54 - Oct 21 with 2804 views | _ |
| Diving apologists on 13:42 - Oct 21 by Jonathans_coat |
Yes! Get in there! DYSS and T2C both disagree with me! What do I win, there must be some sort of prize!.......... No wait, it's a thread on planet swans and they both have a contradictory and controversial opinion, no one could have possibly predicted this outcome!
Seriously tho guys, discussing different opinions are the point of this site, and if everyone agreed it would be irrelevant! Still think he dived, which is cheating, and Monk just told the truth though. |
I tend to agree with lots of what you say but I'm sorry as a manager you can't go around saying those sorts of things and to Leon then I'm sorry again mate but that is not an admission of a dive. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
