Mikel Arteta

Chat about football that isn't Everton in here
4evablu
User avatar
Posts: 200
Karma: 37

Mikel Arteta

Post

Well said that man. It’s about time someone had the balls to come out and say it like it is regarding the officials and VAR.
How they made the decision to give the Newcastle goal is completely baffling.
If you haven’t seen it they reviewed it to see if the ball went out first. Which it clearly did - they said it didn’t. It then went to a second review to see if Wilson had pushed the defender in the back - which he did (Dom got a goal cancelled out for less of a push) - then it went to a third review to see if Gordon was offside which he clearly was - he was in front of the ball clearly stepped back to hit it - behind the goalkeeper with only 1 defender in lineish with him - the whole process stopped the game for about 5 minutes. To add insult to injury the ref on the field had lost the game issuing yellow cards for nothing and not issuing second yellows and reds when they clearly were.
When are we gonna get rid of this bureaucratic nonsense that is ruining the game both as a spectacle and a spectator sport.
Well done Mikel but get ready for the backlash and fine.
WBFBTPL
Cods
User avatar
Posts: 521
Location: 33°51'06.5"S 151°13'06.6"E
Karma: 114

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

Except he was wrong on at least one of the three, if not all three. One of the few times VAR didn't stuff up IMO, largely because they didn't have any evidence to confirm it, so it reverts back to ref's call.

The ball wasn't *definitely* out, which it has to be to be called. There is no way this can be seen from the available footage. It's falling for parallax error, to claim it was out. We saw it with Japan at the World Cup, a ball looked for all money to be out due to the angle of the camera, yet it wasn't. Play on.

The non-foul was the right call for me as there's too many beefy centre backs effectively taking dives at the first slight contact, and there wasn't much in it despite what the still image purported to show. It's a contact sport.

The offside could have been worked on for longer to get a definitive answer (yet the process was already dangerously slow at 4 mins) if the cameras are time synced. It doesn't appear as though Gordon could have been onside during the window of contact between the ball and Joelinton, but again, unless it can be proven he was offside, then he's got to be treated as onside. Like a run out in cricket where you can't see the bails being dislodged, benefit of the doubt/umpire's call.

Arteta's talk of the title being at stake is entirely irrelevant to the decision around whether it was a goal or not. Manager not able to contain his emotions.

Ian Wright's wrong too.

Despite all that I'm still against VAR.
4evablu
User avatar
Posts: 200
Karma: 37

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

Sorry I disagree you can actually see grass between the ball and the line
I agree players go down to easy but how many get them and how many don’t
And the offside rule clearly states 2 opposition players between attacker and goal which there wasn’t and he was ahead of the ball

I applaud Arteta for his comments which were totally controlled and well thought out and put across from the outset…
And like he said if they lose the league by 3 points of course it makes a difference exactly the same if a team had of been relegated by 3 points ala Leeds and burnley
WBFBTPL
Cereal Killer
Posts: 377
Karma: 87

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

You must be new, go read up on how the curve of the ball can mean it’s still in even if you can see some grass ;)

Did Arteta have any comment on why Havertz wasn’t sent off? Another VAR bottle job
Shogun
User avatar
Posts: 2502
Karma: 1126

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

Havertz one looked worse than it was imo. No excuse for Bruno's elbow though.
Cods
User avatar
Posts: 521
Location: 33°51'06.5"S 151°13'06.6"E
Karma: 114

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

4evablu wrote: Sun Nov 05, 2023 6:50 pm Sorry I disagree you can actually see grass between the ball and the line
I agree players go down to easy but how many get them and how many don’t
And the offside rule clearly states 2 opposition players between attacker and goal which there wasn’t and he was ahead of the ball

I applaud Arteta for his comments which were totally controlled and well thought out and put across from the outset…
And like he said if they lose the league by 3 points of course it makes a difference exactly the same if a team had of been relegated by 3 points ala Leeds and burnley
At the risk of rehashing old ground...

The foul call is subjective, we can disagree here. There's no consistency and there can't be, refs are always going to call it how they see it at the time. Nothing can fix this, it's interpretation.

The offside rule is clear for sure, it's whether or not it can be seen that at the time Joelinton passed it, that Gordon was offside. I tend to agree that it was likely offside, yet it couldn't be *proven* that it was from the available VAR footage, and the linesman didn't call it.

The ball crossing the line is still parallax error. The ball can very much *appear* as though it's out from an incorrect viewpoint (grass between the ball and the line), yet not actually be out. If there was a perfectly aligned camera view from directly above the ball this would have been able to help, but there wasnt. The rules state that ball would have to have no part of it crossing the line. It's impossible to say this is the case from the footage. This bloke illustrates it pretty well.

https://twitter.com/TheSharpeEnd/status ... 6482651180

Arsenal might not have found it more difficult to win the league had they actually put the ball in Newcastle's net a couple of times. ;)
4evablu
User avatar
Posts: 200
Karma: 37

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

I understand and respect all your perspectives but i still think the bottom line is the system doesn't seem to help anyone and is causing more issues than assistance. I for one applaud arteta coming out and saying what he said as opposed to the other feller talking nonsense. It would of been interesting if arteta had also asked for a replay. But then again he's more dignified than that.
WBFBTPL
blueToffee
User avatar
Posts: 475
Karma: 104

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

Arteta is probably one of the most petulant managers in the league and it seems the only time he's not prickly is when they're on a winning streak.

In terms of this, I'd agree with some of the comments before me that Bruno Guimaraes' missed red card was the most blatant error of the day. How VAR didn't call that one back is honestly baffling. How he still isn't punished retrospectively is more proof of the uneven playing field.

Havertz's situation is a bit more complicated. The first challenge did look at first glance a lot worse than it was, I think that was only a yellow in the end, However around the start of the second half he probably should've gone for another sliding challenge where he caught the player pretty high on the shin I believe. It was called a foul as far as I recall, and while the impact was fairly modest it was far more reckless than the (sorry to bring it up again) than Ashley Young's slide for his second yellow.

In terms of the goal, it was probably right that the on field decision stood if they really weren't sure. I agree it wasn't clear from the one angle provided if the ball was actually out, yes you can see grass but as mentioned the centre of the ball could still be overhanging the line and without another angle you can't tell for certain. I'm kinda amazed more images haven't come out showing something more level with the line. The second incident the foul not given I think probably was a foul given the two hands on the back, and I think this was maybe the biggest complaint, but it was still a little hard to tell if the Arsenal player was initially stooping to flick the ball over and again the footage wasn't the best. I probably would've ruled it out for that myself, but it's not as blatant as some make out. I'm wondering how I'd feel if DCL did that and it was ruled out, it might feel like he just he had momentum and wanted it more? So, yeah, really not sure. Finally if they really didn't have the angles for the lines etc then it's also hard to rule it out for offside.
TheRam
Posts: 906
Karma: 662

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

Obviously really liked him as a player but can’t stand him as a manager.

He seems obsessed with making himself the main character in everything.

The way he acts on the touchline, the raya signing, now the way he’s reacted to what happened at the weekend.

He is a very emotional manager, who thinks too much about himself, coming up with the new cool tactic thing.

I find arsenal to be very boring to watch. I think they’ll leave at least 12 points on the table this season through the manager making strange decisions to try and make himself look clever.

I find a lot of modern managers to be like this. It’s makes the game incredibly frustrating to take an interest in a lot of the time.

Signing a keeper who’s pretty average at saving shots just because he’s a bit better at beating the press is ridiculous.
bigmanbob
Posts: 111
Karma: 21

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

I agreed with everything up until you said they were boring to watch. They're like 70's Brazil compared to us
Robioto
Posts: 61
Karma: 8

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

To be crude, I think he is a dickhead.

He's obviously got Arsenal playing well which is great (been well off it this season compared to last so far though), but the way he conducts himself and asks his players to act, is embarrasing. I'm still not convinced on him as a "top tier" manager yet, I feel his tactics worked well last season but it's all very one-dimensional, I believe the best managers adapt, have different options in the squad to deal with different situations and matches. But he just plays the same style over and over with little devation and teams are starting to figure it out.

The whole Raya and Ramsdale thing is just plain odd and hasn't really worked, he's pissed Ramsdale off who hasn't been as good as last season and when he has played and Raya has been a dodgy when he has come in. Having Jesus as your main striker is never going to work either, talented player, but he's never been a goalscorer as he misses too many chances, a clear weakness last season.

I like watching Arsenal play in general, but I don't think the sun shnines out of Arteta's arse as much as Arsenal fans would have you believe.
74Blue
Posts: 91
Karma: 51

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

Cods wrote: Sun Nov 05, 2023 11:03 am Except he was wrong on at least one of the three, if not all three. One of the few times VAR didn't stuff up IMO, largely because they didn't have any evidence to confirm it, so it reverts back to ref's call.

The ball wasn't *definitely* out, which it has to be to be called. There is no way this can be seen from the available footage. It's falling for parallax error, to claim it was out. We saw it with Japan at the World Cup, a ball looked for all money to be out due to the angle of the camera, yet it wasn't. Play on.

The non-foul was the right call for me as there's too many beefy centre backs effectively taking dives at the first slight contact, and there wasn't much in it despite what the still image purported to show. It's a contact sport.

The offside could have been worked on for longer to get a definitive answer (yet the process was already dangerously slow at 4 mins) if the cameras are time synced. It doesn't appear as though Gordon could have been onside during the window of contact between the ball and Joelinton, but again, unless it can be proven he was offside, then he's got to be treated as onside. Like a run out in cricket where you can't see the bails being dislodged, benefit of the doubt/umpire's call.

Arteta's talk of the title being at stake is entirely irrelevant to the decision around whether it was a goal or not. Manager not able to contain his emotions.

Ian Wright's wrong too.

Despite all that I'm still against VAR.
I have to disagree with the assertion that the defender (Gabriel, I think) went down too easily. There are clearly two hands on his back as he is pushed. If that's not a foul, then I'm not sure what is. It's very clear, two hands on his back and a distinct pushing motion, that has to be a foul.

If the footage is inconclusive with regard to whether the ball went out of play or whether or not Gordon was offside, then surely that completely defeats the object of millions of pounds of investment in "cutting edge" technology to eradicate mistakes, and the expense of having additional resources sat in Stockley Park with all of the tools at their disposal to dissect every decision.
You're telling me that VAR can determine that a player is offside because his toenail is ahead of the defender, but is not able to determine whether a ball has fully crossed a white line?

If that's truly the case, then what exactly is the point of having this expensive set of toys that clearly do not work?

It's not just the Newcastle/Arsenal game that is blighted by VAR. We have controversial decisions happening in every single game, every week. Is that not the point of VAR? A lot of these decisions are not even marginal, they are clear as day, yet the super-sophisticated array of expensive cameras and computer wizardry is unable to see what us fans can see with our naked eyes from the stands. How exactly is that benefitting the game that we love?

Referees have got things wrong since football was invented. However, when it's just a poor refereeing decision, it can be written off as simple human error. We are supposed to have the very latest cutting edge technology to eradicate those "human-errors", but rather than solving the problem, if anything it's made it even worse!
Cods
User avatar
Posts: 521
Location: 33°51'06.5"S 151°13'06.6"E
Karma: 114

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

74Blue wrote: Tue Nov 07, 2023 7:56 pm
Cods wrote: Sun Nov 05, 2023 11:03 am Except he was wrong on at least one of the three, if not all three. One of the few times VAR didn't stuff up IMO, largely because they didn't have any evidence to confirm it, so it reverts back to ref's call.

The ball wasn't *definitely* out, which it has to be to be called. There is no way this can be seen from the available footage. It's falling for parallax error, to claim it was out. We saw it with Japan at the World Cup, a ball looked for all money to be out due to the angle of the camera, yet it wasn't. Play on.

The non-foul was the right call for me as there's too many beefy centre backs effectively taking dives at the first slight contact, and there wasn't much in it despite what the still image purported to show. It's a contact sport.

The offside could have been worked on for longer to get a definitive answer (yet the process was already dangerously slow at 4 mins) if the cameras are time synced. It doesn't appear as though Gordon could have been onside during the window of contact between the ball and Joelinton, but again, unless it can be proven he was offside, then he's got to be treated as onside. Like a run out in cricket where you can't see the bails being dislodged, benefit of the doubt/umpire's call.

Arteta's talk of the title being at stake is entirely irrelevant to the decision around whether it was a goal or not. Manager not able to contain his emotions.

Ian Wright's wrong too.

Despite all that I'm still against VAR.
I have to disagree with the assertion that the defender (Gabriel, I think) went down too easily. There are clearly two hands on his back as he is pushed. If that's not a foul, then I'm not sure what is. It's very clear, two hands on his back and a distinct pushing motion, that has to be a foul.

If the footage is inconclusive with regard to whether the ball went out of play or whether or not Gordon was offside, then surely that completely defeats the object of millions of pounds of investment in "cutting edge" technology to eradicate mistakes, and the expense of having additional resources sat in Stockley Park with all of the tools at their disposal to dissect every decision.
You're telling me that VAR can determine that a player is offside because his toenail is ahead of the defender, but is not able to determine whether a ball has fully crossed a white line?

If that's truly the case, then what exactly is the point of having this expensive set of toys that clearly do not work?

It's not just the Newcastle/Arsenal game that is blighted by VAR. We have controversial decisions happening in every single game, every week. Is that not the point of VAR? A lot of these decisions are not even marginal, they are clear as day, yet the super-sophisticated array of expensive cameras and computer wizardry is unable to see what us fans can see with our naked eyes from the stands. How exactly is that benefitting the game that we love?

Referees have got things wrong since football was invented. However, when it's just a poor refereeing decision, it can be written off as simple human error. We are supposed to have the very latest cutting edge technology to eradicate those "human-errors", but rather than solving the problem, if anything it's made it even worse!
Just to be clear (hopefully) on a few things...

In this instance with the Gabriel 'foul' and in other subjective calls like it, more often than not you will see a player's knees buckle and legs give way not due to the force of the challenge but from the learned response that is 'go down as soon as you feel contact'. I don't believe there was sufficient force from the arms to force the player to fall in this challenge, and it certainly can be argued that there wasn't in this subjective call. Happy enough that you believe that there was, that's completely OK of course. For me though, two hands in a players back doesn't automatically mean that there was enough force applied to have fouled the player, based upon what we could see. I've watched it back a few times since, and seen the stills and the analysis and I don't believe it was a blatant push, but that in any aerial challenge arms are justifiably and fairly used for balance/protection/bracing a fall after a leap. (recall DCL being called for this alot, IMO unfairly)

Personally I think that football has approached netball levels of physicality in some instances (and also conversely, not, in some others). Strength should be, and is still a part of the game, if used within limits. The rules were put in place to limit rough conduct and unfair advantages, and in practice they've quickly become 'the letter of the law, in any way we can mould the definition to our favour', rather than, 'the letter of the law viewed within the context from which the laws were created'.

I agree with you regarding the use of VAR as it is currently being implemented being very problematic, detrimental to the game, and a waste of time and money. I think it is something we could largely do without. (Except if/when it can be provided consistently for implementation in non-subjective decisions, for example, goal line/byline technology).

Newcastle/Arsenal wasn't blighted by VAR though, except that it took so long to 'resolve' what the referees had already decided in real time. The 3 decisions around the goal IMO were correct, or at very least fair enough, and those that were subjective can pretty easily be understood and defended. (I haven't seen enough of the Havertz / Guimaras incidents to form an opinion on them).

Differences of opinion, yes, but no howlers to correct in the action around Newcastle's goal. And after all, it's ultimately the ref's call.

To the detriment of the game, we seem to have forgotten ‘benefit of the doubt’ and ‘play the whistle’. VAR has devalued the referee’s authority which has made the situation worse for fans, referees, and in particular kids growing up playing the game and wanting EPL-levels of standard/scrutiny for their boggy, uneven-pitch seven-a-side, refereed by volunteers. The kids develop no understanding listening to the ill-advised words of their ‘former hero’ commentators who invariably are unable to put a coherent or logical opinion forward, and are usually influenced by their own biases (which we're all subject to).

Zooming out, that proverbial toenail, being a quarter inch past the defender’s shoulder in a very close offside call when it comes down to it has no real bearing upon the validity (or otherwise) of a goal as far as a player gaining an advantage, finding the line is difficult, but why is accepting the ref’s decision even harder?

Ref’s call, play on. Respect them and your opponent. Shake hands after the game... and pull your head in, Mikel/Jurgen, you and others are setting a bad example with your petulant, illogical and heavily-biased self-interested tirades.
Shogun
User avatar
Posts: 2502
Karma: 1126

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

It's hilarious to see how quickly the Ramsdale/Raya situation has unfolded into a mess. Plenty of people saying this was going to happen before the season but contrarians said having two number 1 goalkeepers was fine and he'll just rotate them. Never going to happen in a million years.

And Raya hasn't even been particularly good.
Gash
Posts: 1148
Location: Dumfries and Galloway
Karma: 531

Re: Mikel Arteta

Post

He's just saving face with Raya rather than admit he's dropped a bit of a bollock. Can't go dropping the guy he wanted in favour of the guy he happily dropped earlier in the season.
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic