"That" Tackle

[LeRouxIsPHat]

SB, given that you ignored my question to analyse both tweets to form a rational conclusion as to what he meant, I'll repeat them again. This time I've bolded the parts that you didn't read or chose to ignore. Note that you're still yet to mention the second one. If you take the two logically then you'll see that I never made anything up and am in no way deluded. I took the time to read 3 whole sentences, please do the same...at the third time of asking.

"I apologise to the fans for getting sent off but no way was I pulling out of that tackle in a game of that importance. Sorry"

He also retweeted a tweet by someone else which said...

"If he stayed on his feet he would be out for 6 months with a broken leg".

Now having read them in their entirety (I'd hope you managed it at this stage), what do you think he meant? Was he apologising on behalf of the ref for making a mistake? Let's not forget the photographic evidence of how bad his tackle was (actually think your post indicated that you actually did mellow on that point) when you're reading the tweets, it all points to him apologising for it because it was quite clearly a bad tackle.

Trust me, your point didn't go over my head but not surprised that it didn't quite work the other way around. My point about the 14 shots was that the ref couldn't have hamstrung your performance that much because you still managed to dominate the game.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

You also said that your original point was that you said "I also originally stated Shelvey and Evans should have been spoken to or both sent off." Actually you didn't, this was your original point.

"The game changed when he decided to send off a player who made a good tackle against a player who went in with 2 feet off the ground and studs showing. Why wasn't he sent off?"

Then you changed your mind.

"Shelvey had ONE FOOT ON THE GROUND and GOT THE BALL FIRST.
Evans HAD NO FEET ON THE GROUND WITH STUDS SHOWING.
Shelvey got the ball 1st then caught Evans. Evans whined and played the ref.
Both players should have been sent off or either spoken to with a yellow."

Then I said that you were wrong for saying originally that it was a good tackle.

Then you changed your mind again and said it was a good tackle and used photographic evidence...photographic evidence that actually showed that he had one foot off the ground. So which was it? A good tackle or did they both deserve to go? Or both deserve to stay? Take your time, you were obviously confused at that point.

Then you said that Shelvey's was technically better than Evans. That's completely irrelevant though isn't it? Shelvey's tackle deserved red and he got it. That means that you can't defend him for it. As I said before, I don't care what you think about Evans' tackle, MY original point was that Shelvey deserved to go and you argued with that.

Now you being you, you're going to say "Well of course it's relevant, they both should have received the same sanction"...but again, I never argued that. I just argued your point that it was a good tackle.

Any chance you could admit that it was a bad tackle now? Just admit it was a bad tackle and then feel free to curse Evans/the ref to your hearts content.

[suisse]

Excuse me if I don't take you seriously whilst you pretend to be very drunk yet somehow manage to post on a forum.
Looking for attention in a manner of ....'ooh look at me, im drunk as a skunk, aren't I great craic'.

Pitiful and cringeworthy in equal measure.

Stick to your wonderfully uninteresting musings on all things Korean, at least they don't appear stage managed.

Haha whatever. You were always one to try and disprove what you didn't witness (irrespective of the topic or situation). Don't even pretend to have seen me writing anything substantial about Korea on this message board (except, maybe, in the Olympics/Stadia threads) in the last dozen months. I must admit though, it is a better feeling than sitting at home worrying about Slur Alex Ferguson and whether this team's fans are misbehaving more than my team's fans.

I think it's great we can use the same adjectives to describe each other. A special development in our relationship. Where do you think we'll be next time?

[Sauvignon Blank]

Excuse me if I don't take you seriously whilst you pretend to be very drunk yet somehow manage to post on a forum.
Looking for attention in a manner of ....'ooh look at me, im drunk as a skunk, aren't I great craic'.

Pitiful and cringeworthy in equal measure.

Stick to your wonderfully uninteresting musings on all things Korean, at least they don't appear stage managed.

Haha whatever. You were always one to try and disprove what you didn't witness (irrespective of the topic or situation). Don't even pretend to have seen me writing anything substantial about Korea on this message board (except, maybe, in the Olympics/Stadia threads) in the last dozen months. I must admit though, it is a better feeling than sitting at home worrying about Slur Alex Ferguson and whether this team's fans are misbehaving more than my team's fans.I think it's great we can use the same adjectives to describe each other. A special development in our relationship. Where do you think we'll be next time?

Methinks you doth protest too much.

Thankfully, the only thing 'I sit at home worrying about' is whether to have plain or chocolate digestives with my tea of an evening, and maybe the current bunch of f***wits running the country into the ground. Resulting in thousands of our youth having to emigrate weekly to far flung outposts. Much like you perhaps.

Somehow I doubt yours is 'a better feeling' in reality, Mr Suisse. As evidenced by your drink fuelled attention seeking exploits.

[suisse]

Methinks you doth protest too much.

Thankfully, the only thing 'I sit at home worrying about' is whether to have plain or chocolate digestives with my tea of an evening, and maybe the current bunch of f***wits running the country into the ground. Resulting in thousands of our youth having to emigrate weekly to far flung outposts. Much like you perhaps.

Somehow I doubt yours is 'a better feeling' in reality, Mr Suisse. As evidenced by your drink fuelled attention seeking exploits.

I would consider a life (partially) dedicated to teaching some of the brightest minds on the planet to be "a better feeling" indeed Mr. Blank. All the more so given "the current bunch of f***wits running the country" are not the reason I choose to leave our island. It was a choice made and helps to ensure I don't have to tell LRIP to "get a f*****g grip" because (what appears to be - I don't have Twitter) his fact filled arguement contradicts your own agenda.

He might be waiting for a response after he supplied some facts for you, as requested. You think you can offer a nice one? No? Ah go on.... I think you want to.........pretty please??? He'll be nice back to you, I'm sure of it!

[Sauvignon Blank]

You also said that your original point was that you said "I also originally stated Shelvey and Evans should have been spoken to or both sent off." Actually you didn't, this was your original point.

"The game changed when he decided to send off a player who made a good tackle against a player who went in with 2 feet off the ground and studs showing. Why wasn't he sent off?"

Then you changed your mind.

"Shelvey had ONE FOOT ON THE GROUND and GOT THE BALL FIRST.
Evans HAD NO FEET ON THE GROUND WITH STUDS SHOWING.
Shelvey got the ball 1st then caught Evans. Evans whined and played the ref.
Both players should have been sent off or either spoken to with a yellow."

Then I said that you were wrong for saying originally that it was a good tackle.

Then you changed your mind again and said it was a good tackle and used photographic evidence...photographic evidence that actually showed that he had one foot off the ground. So which was it? A good tackle or did they both deserve to go? Or both deserve to stay? Take your time, you were obviously confused at that point.

Then you said that Shelvey's was technically better than Evans. That's completely irrelevant though isn't it? Shelvey's tackle deserved red and he got it. That means that you can't defend him for it. As I said before, I don't care what you think about Evans' tackle, MY original point was that Shelvey deserved to go and you argued with that.

Now you being you, you're going to say "Well of course it's relevant, they both should have received the same sanction"...but again, I never argued that. I just argued your point that it was a good tackle.

Any chance you could admit that it was a bad tackle now? Just admit it was a bad tackle and then feel free to curse Evans/the ref to your hearts content.

It has become quite obvious now that youre wriggling and that you won't produce any evidence whatsoever of Shelvey apologising for 'a bad tackle'. He apologised for getting sent off (tiresome now repeating this). I have repeatedly asked you to show proof of something you think was said. You can't and therefore will not.

Shelvey didn't apologise for a bad tackle. You know this and I know this and you are well aware your argument flounders on this crucial point. But do carry on wriggling and by all means try and prove me wrong and you will get an apology but failing that have the good grace to admit you were/are wrong.

[Sauvignon Blank]

Methinks you doth protest too much.

Thankfully, the only thing 'I sit at home worrying about' is whether to have plain or chocolate digestives with my tea of an evening, and maybe the current bunch of f***wits running the country into the ground. Resulting in thousands of our youth having to emigrate weekly to far flung outposts. Much like you perhaps.

Somehow I doubt yours is 'a better feeling' in reality, Mr Suisse. As evidenced by your drink fuelled attention seeking exploits.

I would consider a life (partially) dedicated to teaching some of the brightest minds on the planet to be "a better feeling" indeed Mr. Blank. All the more so given "the current bunch of f***wits running the country" are not the reason I choose to leave our island. It was a choice made and helps to ensure I don't have to tell LRIP to "get a f*****g grip" because (what appears to be - I don't have Twitter) his fact filled arguement contradicts your own agenda.

He might be waiting for a response after he supplied some facts for you, as requested. You think you can offer a nice one? No? Ah go on.... I think you want to.........pretty please??? He'll be nice back to you, I'm sure of it!

Is that what the brochure told you?

Ah bless, a teacher no less.

And did this 'choice' also help ensure you tap away on your keyboard after a few whiskeys looking for attention?

As a teacher you seem to have a tenuous grasp of the concept of 'Facts'.

I respect your profession and you do good work educating people but it's hardly cutting edge stuff and I am always reminded of a truism I heard many years back at a product launch, something along the lines of...

' Those that can.... do, those that can't....teach'


PS Are my spellings ok?

[LeRouxIsPHat]

It has become quite obvious now that youre wriggling and that you won't produce any evidence whatsoever of Shelvey apologising for 'a bad tackle'. He apologised for getting sent off (tiresome now repeating this). I have repeatedly asked you to show proof of something you think was said. You can't and therefore will not.

Shelvey didn't apologise for a bad tackle. You know this and I know this and you are well aware your argument flounders on this crucial point. But do carry on wriggling and by all means try and prove me wrong and you will get an apology but failing that have the good grace to admit you were/are wrong.

Ha. How rich of you to say that I'm wriggling when you ignored my post until suisse mentioned it and then proceeded to ignore my plea for you to give me your interpretation of the tweets! You are STILL yet to acknowledge the second tweet btw, any danger of giving it a quick read?

At this stage I think you have stopped denying that it was a bad tackle, good for you! With that in mind (and if you try and resurrect that pathetic argument then please see this image again: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/ ... 34x391.jpg), why do you think he apologised to the fans for getting sent off?

I'll actually repeat the tweets again (because you somehow keep missing them) just to guide you:

"I apologise to the fans for getting sent off but no way was I pulling out of that tackle in a game of that importance. Sorry"

and

"If he stayed on his feet he would be out for 6 months with a broken leg".

I thought that they were easily comprehensible so didn't think they needed my interpretation but I'll give you mine and you give me yours, deal? The second one acknowledges that he was off his feet and therefore that he deserved a red. Using my cunning powers of deduction and the fact that he said "no way was I pulling out of that tackle" to mean that he knows it was something he shouldn't have done, I can see some connection between his act and the apology that followed. Now if he knew he should have pulled out...and he knew that he was off his feet...and he knew he deserved a red card...why did he apologise to the fans?

I think you've actually come around to the fact that the tackle WAS bad but that the apology had nothing to do with it, is that right? You think that he apologised for leaving them with 10 men despite (in both your minds) not doing anything wrong? Despite the fact that he clearly acknowledges that he was off his feet and shouldn't have made the tackle?

Are you genuinely saying that he apologised for being sent off but that the tackle that brought about that red card was irrelevant to him saying sorry to the fans?

So to sum up again, I think that the tweets indicate that he knew the tackle was bad (because his feet were off the ground: see tweet number 2) and that he shouldn't have done it (see tweet number 1 "but no way was I pulling out of that tackle") and that his apology reinforces that. And your argument with that is....?

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Oh and I should add that I wasn't looking for an apology because I was right and you were wrong, I wanted one for you calling me a liar. You can disagree with my points (well obviously not in this case because I have evidence to back my points up whereas you have nothing) all you want but don't call me a liar.

[suisse]

Is that what the brochure told you?

Ah bless, a teacher no less.

And did this 'choice' also help ensure you tap away on your keyboard after a few whiskeys looking for attention?

As a teacher you seem to have a tenuous grasp of the concept of 'Facts'.

I respect your profession and you do good work educating people but it's hardly cutting edge stuff and I am always reminded of a truism I heard many years back at a product launch, something along the lines of...

' Those that can.... do, those that can't....teach'


PS Are my spellings ok?

Nah, not from a brochure my man. I'm not booking a holiday to Crete in 1997. I wouldn't touch whiskey but I enjoyed the Ballentine's Open. Does that count?

I never said it was cutting edge but if you see what it entails (in 2012) you might think just a little bit differently (from a technology p.o.v.), but I understand it is difficult for you sometimes to consider alternative opinions or, indeed, facts. I think it is worth pointing out that I used the word "partially" in that sentence. This is not the only job I have here and the other one absolutely requires a grasp of what a fact is (***waiting for your latest cutting edge - see what I did there? - quip). It is also important not to be blinded by hypocrisy and biasm, and one must remain somewhat calm and collected at all times. Probably not a job for everyone. Just sayin', like! Relax bud.

I was having a read over your latest response to LRIP a few minutes ago. I enjoyed this line: "tiresome now repeating this" - a fair enough position to be in, but do you want to, finally, answer the query about what is different between Evra and Ferdinand running 10 meters to influence a referee as opposed to Luis Saurez?

you won't produce any evidence whatsoever of Shelvey apologising for 'a bad tackle'. He apologised for getting sent off (tiresome now repeating this)

Not terribly interested in this debate (waiting for another quip SB) but in order for people not to feel tiresome, I think this is what LRIP is trying to say.

"I apologise to the fans for getting sent off but no way was I pulling out of that tackle in a game of that importance. Sorry"

"If he stayed on his feet he would be out for 6 months with a broken leg"

Maybe LRIP is reading too much into the Tweets or maybe he sees what Shelvey is trying to say, but for whatever reason it came out as above. I think he is trying to tell you Shelvey has acknowledged that had Evans stayed on his feet, the nature of the tackle would have broken his leg. I know it could/can happen, but it not often a player is out for 6 months with a broken leg caused by a good tackle. The wording of the tweets leaves it open for debate and uncertainty, but it seems Shelvey is apologising for getting sent off for a tackle that could have broken Evans' leg. I think you boys will have to leave this one.

[Sauvignon Blank]

It has become quite obvious now that youre wriggling and that you won't produce any evidence whatsoever of Shelvey apologising for 'a bad tackle'. He apologised for getting sent off (tiresome now repeating this). I have repeatedly asked you to show proof of something you think was said. You can't and therefore will not.

Shelvey didn't apologise for a bad tackle. You know this and I know this and you are well aware your argument flounders on this crucial point. But do carry on wriggling and by all means try and prove me wrong and you will get an apology but failing that have the good grace to admit you were/are wrong.

Ha. How rich of you to say that I'm wriggling when you ignored my post until suisse mentioned it and then proceeded to ignore my plea for you to give me your interpretation of the tweets! You are STILL yet to acknowledge the second tweet btw, any danger of giving it a quick read? Your problem is summed up here, interpretation,opinion,a hunch etc. Please provide factual evidence.

At this stage I think you have stopped denying that it was a bad tackle, good for you! Really? I still maintain it was a good tackle. Your making things up again LRIP,tut tut tut. I think you miss the point thast good tackles are regularly punished in the PL with cards whilst bad ones are eually let go i.e Evans.

With that in mind (and if you try and resurrect that pathetic argument then please see this image again: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/ ... 34x391.jpg), why do you think he apologised to the fans for getting sent off? Umm,erm,for leaving his team down to 10 men in a big derby game and thus making it difficult to get a result, I would hazard a wild guess.

I'll actually repeat the tweets again (because you somehow keep missing them) just to guide you:

"I apologise to the fans for getting sent off but no way was I pulling out of that tackle in a game of that importance. Sorry"

and

"If he stayed on his feet he would be out for 6 months with a broken leg".

Are you nuts? You seem to have difficulty recognising basic words and how they are constructed to make a sentence and convey meaning. Again, where does he admit it was a bad tackle and thus apologises for making that bad tackle. Jesus wept, stop making things up will you.

I thought that they were easily comprehensible so didn't think they needed my interpretation...you assume quite a lot, incorrectly as well.
but I'll give you mine and you give me yours, deal? The second one acknowledges that he was off his feet and therefore that he deserved a red. Eh, no it doesnt. You acknowledge it deserves a red. There is a subtle but huge difference there fella. Lost on you I know.

Using my cunning powers of deduction ..or ability to spoof...don't you mean your opinion/interpretation here as opposed to actual words said by Shelvey to deduce something that wasn't said at all?
and the fact that he said "no way was I pulling out of that tackle" to mean that he knows it was something he shouldn't have done, I can see some connection between his act and the apology that followed. He means leaving his team short against their rivals, that is all, nothing else. Amazing you can't see this, really is jaw dropping stuff from you.
Now if he knew he should have pulled out...and he knew that he was off his feet...and he knew he deserved a red card...why did he apologise to the fans? You are nuts LRIP..

I think you've actually come around to the fact that the tackle WAS bad ..no I have not. Applying your dodgy rartionale here I see, coming to wrong conclusions again....but that the apology had nothing to do with it, is that right? No, not at all. Just provide quotes that contain the words "IM SORRY FOR MAKING THAT BAD TACKLE ON JOHNNY EVANS,I DESERVED TO BE SENT OFF,IT WAS MY FAULT

You think that he apologised for leaving them with 10 men despite (in both your minds) not doing anything wrong? Despite the fact that he clearly acknowledges that he was off his feet and shouldn't have made the tackle? Oh dear. At this stage my responses will just simply say..proof please of what he actually said verbatim.......and not your opinion/interpretation please.

Are you genuinely saying that he apologised for being sent off ..absolutely...but that the tackle that brought about that red card was irrelevant to him saying sorry to the fans?

So to sum up again, I think that the tweets indicate that he knew the tackle was bad (because his feet were off the ground: see tweet number 2) and that he shouldn't have done it (see tweet number 1 "but no way was I pulling out of that tackle") and that his apology reinforces that. And your argument with that is....?

The same as it was previously, stop makings things up. Shelvey didn't admit to a bad tackle and you have provided NO EVIDENCE except your long winded, contradictory, skewed opinions and interpretations. You would be laughed out of court with your attempt to perverse the course of this thread(pardon the pun(s)).
Until you provide such evidence then i'm not interested in what you..... suspect,opine,have a hunch for,interpret or indeed feel may been meant by Shelvey.

Admit you are wrong.

[Sauvignon Blank]

Is that what the brochure told you?

Ah bless, a teacher no less.

And did this 'choice' also help ensure you tap away on your keyboard after a few whiskeys looking for attention?

As a teacher you seem to have a tenuous grasp of the concept of 'Facts'.

I respect your profession and you do good work educating people but it's hardly cutting edge stuff and I am always reminded of a truism I heard many years back at a product launch, something along the lines of...

' Those that can.... do, those that can't....teach'


PS Are my spellings ok?

Nah, not from a brochure my man. I'm not booking a holiday to Crete in 1997. I wouldn't touch whiskey but I enjoyed the Ballentine's Open. Does that count?

I never said it was cutting edge but if you see what it entails (in 2012) you might think just a little bit differently (from a technology p.o.v.), but I understand it is difficult for you sometimes to consider alternative opinions or, indeed, facts. I think it is worth pointing out that I used the word "partially" in that sentence. This is not the only job I have here and the other one absolutely requires a grasp of what a fact is (***waiting for your latest cutting edge - see what I did there? - quip). It is also important not to be blinded by hypocrisy and biasm, and one must remain somewhat calm and collected at all times. Probably not a job for everyone. Just sayin', like! Relax bud. Whats that?

I was having a read over your latest response to LRIP a few minutes ago. I enjoyed this line: "tiresome now repeating this" - a fair enough position to be in, but do you want to, finally, answer the query about what is different between Evra and Ferdinand running 10 meters to influence a referee as opposed to Luis Saurez? Sure, no difference. Dont like seeing Luis doing it but understand why he did it. I hate this act of getting players sent off,running considerable distances to get a fellow pro sent off. Only problem here is the 2 ManU protagonists involved, a known liar and a known drug cheat. The latter has a reputation for doing this quite as lot. Running to the ref that is.

you won't produce any evidence whatsoever of Shelvey apologising for 'a bad tackle'. He apologised for getting sent off (tiresome now repeating this)

Not terribly interested in this debate (waiting for another quip SB) but in order for people not to feel tiresome, I think this is what LRIP is trying to say.

"I apologise to the fans for getting sent off but no way was I pulling out of that tackle in a game of that importance. Sorry"

"If he stayed on his feet he would be out for 6 months with a broken leg"

Maybe LRIP is reading too much into the Tweets or maybe he sees what Shelvey is trying to say, but for whatever reason it came out as above. I think he is trying to tell you Shelvey has acknowledged that had Evans stayed on his feet, the nature of the tackle would have broken his leg. I know it could/can happen, but it not often a player is out for 6 months with a broken leg caused by a good tackle. The wording of the tweets leaves it open for debate and uncertainty, but it seems Shelvey is apologising for getting sent off for a tackle that could have broken Evans' leg. I think you boys will have to leave this one.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Suisse, the second tweet was by someone else that he repeated i.e. Someone else said that Shelvey said was off his feet but that he'd have broken his legs if he hadn't been and he agreed. Don't make me start arguing with you too!!

[LeRouxIsPHat]

SB, your ability to dodge questions is astonishing. Saying I'm wrong and giving no explanation as to why is not the same thing as answering my question!

Why are you so afraid to analyse the tweets? You have STILL not acknowledged that he said "no way was I pulling out of that", are you ready yet to tell me what he meant by those words?

And the second tweet was by someone else which said that he (Shelvey) was off his feet. Shelvey retweeted this which is akin to quoting a post on here and saying "+1". Now if he acknowledges that he was off his feet then obviously it follows that he knows it was a red card because thems the rules. Yes?

Given my inability to to comprehend English, could you finally give me your analysis of ALL of the tweets? I'm not stupid, I can see that you still haven't looked past about 4 of the words that it contained. Please just answer my question now so that we can end this asap.

You called me a liar and therefore I won't give up until you do. I don't even have to agree with you, once I get a reasoned analysis of ALL of the tweets that I can't pick holes in then I'll let it go.

And you still think it was a good tackle? Despite this photo? http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/ ... 34x391.jpg So you think a guy with a foot off the ground who went over the ball with studs showing shouldn't be sent off? Get a grip! I obviously won't change your mind on that but your view is actually insane.

[Sauvignon Blank]

SB, your ability to dodge questions is astonishing. Saying I'm wrong and giving no explanation as to why is not the same thing as answering my question!

Thats plain ludicrous, it's not the same.
I'm dodging nothing, i've repeatedly requested from you the line where Shelvey say's or admits.. "I apologise for making a bad tackle", repeatedly. Yet you can't and won't produce this important point.

Why are you so afraid to analyse the tweets? You have STILL not acknowledged that he said "no way was I pulling out of that", are you ready yet to tell me what he meant by those words?

Not afraid to look at anything my dear fellow. I've looked /glanced/digested/analysed etc whatever the tweets and they fail to produce any evidence of culpability for a bad tackle from Shelvey.

Simply point out where he say's it was bad and apologises. Go on, go for it.

And the second tweet was by someone else which said that he (Shelvey) was off his feet. Shelvey retweeted this which is akin to quoting a post on here and saying "+1". Now if he acknowledges that he was off his feet then obviously it follows that he knows it was a red card because thems the rules. Yes?

Thats plain bonkers in fairness. You're now speaking on behalf of a Liverpool midfielder and some anynomous chap from cyberspace. He didn't acknowledge anything you crackpot and nothing follows....etc end of story. WTF

Given my inability to to comprehend English, could you finally give me your analysis of ALL of the tweets? I'm not stupid, I can see that you still haven't looked past about 4 of the words that it contained. Please just answer my question now so that we can end this asap.

Thats one 'to' there.

My analysis of your dear tweets is as follows

1. Shelvey was playing in Liverpools biggest fixture in front of his fans and went full blooded into a tackle. He got the ball and the man. The ref didnt see this and decided he was off. Big derby games are full blooded and the nature of them dictates players put in strong/hard/tough/rough and aggressive tackles. Any player worth his salt wouldn't dare pull up/out of such a 50/50. Shelvey is worth his salt and duly went in to win the ball with one foot planted on the ground and contacting the ball 1st. His opponent was flying off both feet through the air studs showing. He stayed on because he came off worse in the tackle.
2. Shelvey apologised to the fans for getting sent off but no way was he pulling out of that tackle as he went to win the ball. Thats what any professional is expected to do. He done his job.

You called me a liar and therefore I won't give up until you do. I don't even have to agree with you, once I get a reasoned analysis of ALL of the tweets that I can't pick holes in then I'll let it go.

Ermm, could you point out where i called you a 'Liar' please?

Again, you are making things up.

You're bonkers mate.

And you still think it was a good tackle? Despite this photo? http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/ ... 34x391.jpg So you think a guy with a foot off the ground who went over the ball with studs showing shouldn't be sent off? Get a grip! I obviously won't change your mind on that but your view is actually insane.

A great tackle. Not a good one. To paraphrase Johnny Giles.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Still incredible that you can't admit the tackle was bad.

Excellent correction of my grammar though, top argument there. I had the good grace to ignore all of your errors but perhaps I won't be as classy from now on.

So you think he apologised despite the fact that he didn't deserve to be sent off? Why would he do that?

Your ignoring of the tweets is pathetic. He quoted something that someone else said, that's not irrelvant. That quote is also backed up by the photo which showed it was a bad tackle, why is that so hard for you to follow? Hate to break it to you but you can't actually use the tweets to say that he apologised to the fans for being sent off but then ignore the rest of what was said and the medium itself. If you don't find it a credible source (which would be ridiculous given that it's his own personal account) then you can't use it to support your argument either.

Studs showing and wreckless? Check.
Red card to follow? Check.
Apology to fans...
A) On the referee's behalf because he made a mistake? Doubtful.
Or
B) Because of the first two points meaning that he knows he was wrong? Check.

You said I was making things up...that fits under the definition of liar.

[Avenger]

At the risk of fanning the fire between you two, I believe this second "broken legs" tweet is being misinterpreted.

It was part of a conversation. Some chap called Stu Bello tweeted that Shelvey was called out by Rodgers as being a potential red card due to his tendency to dive in.
Some guy called Andy Phillips replied to that with the tweet that Shelvey retweeted.

BR knew 2 months ago that @shelveyJ was likely to get a red this season! #beingliverpool

@billo2112 @shelveyJ if he stayed on his feet he would be out for 6 months with a broken leg #bendtherulessometimes

My interpretation of this is that Phillips is suggesting that Shelvey would be the one with the broken leg and Shelvey retweeted that as it backed his story. I could be wrong in this but I don't think Shelvey is sorry he made the tackle... he apologised to fans for being sent off... not for making the tackle.

I apologise to the fans for getting sent off but no way was I pulling out of that tackle in a game of that importance. Im sorry.

My opinion on it was that Shelvey is over the ball and studs are up (despite going in one footed) so he deserved to go. Evens went in with both feet off the ground and studs up. He has no control of his movement and he also should have been sent off. Who comes off worse in that 50/50 challenge has no bearing on the fact that both players we putting in dangerous tackles and both should have been sent off.

[Sauvignon Blank]

Still incredible that you can't admit the tackle was bad.

Excellent correction of my grammar though, top argument there. I had the good grace to ignore all of your errors but perhaps I won't be as classy from now on.

Jesus wept fella, i was gently ribbing you with that one. Lighten up.

So you think he apologised despite the fact that he didn't deserve to be sent off? Why would he do that?

Cant say for sure as I don't know Jonjo personally but I'd guess he felt bad for the fans, as losing a man in a big game kind of scuppers ones chances of getting a win.

Your ignoring of the tweets is pathetic. He quoted something that someone else said, that's not irrelvant. That quote is also backed up by the photo which showed it was a bad tackle, why is that so hard for you to follow? Hate to break it to you but you can't actually use the tweets to say that he apologised to the fans for being sent off but then ignore the rest of what was said and the medium itself. If you don't find it a credible source (which would be ridiculous given that it's his own personal account) then you can't use it to support your argument either.

Er, you are using the tweets, not me. I'm going on what was actually said by Jonjo. I heard him being interviewed on Sky Sports News the following day just as he was about to play a round of golf. He didn't apologise then for any tackle just like the night before on your darling twitter. Straight from the horses mouth no less. I take the man at his word, you should too.

Studs showing and wreckless? Check.
Red card to follow? Check.
Apology to fans...
A) On the referee's behalf because he made a mistake? Doubtful.
Or
B) Because of the first two points meaning that he knows he was wrong? Check.

You said I was making things up...that fits under the definition of liar.

Thats correct, I did say that a couple of times because you patently were making things up. I can't help what fits in your definition of liar, but in mine it doesn't infer you are a liar per se, just merely incorrect and prone to a mistake. This is down IMHO to your interpretation of what may or not not have been inferred in cyberspace. You suspect & presume Shelvey may have apologised but I on the other hand know he didn't to the best of my knowledge. Knowledge of what Shelvey actually said Verbatim. Draw your own conclusions.

I will go with my logic on this one if you don't mind.

Please illustrate where Shelvey said the following and end this nonsense


" I apologise for making that (Bad) tackle on Sunday"

and FFS don't regurgitate the tweet because as Avenger also rightly points out(something i have also consistently pointed out to you), he never apologised for any tackle, just for being sent off and giving Ferguson jip going off.

[Sauvignon Blank]

And you still think it was a good tackle? Despite this photo? http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/ ... 34x391.jpg So you think a guy with a foot off the ground who went over the ball with studs showing shouldn't be sent off? Get a grip! I obviously won't change your mind on that but your view is actually insane.

Really?

Well i'll see you and raise you this.......Have a look at this photo which proves what I'm saying and also clears Shelvey of malicious intent. This is the 1 reason the young lad is not apologising.

BTW the bloke in white,flying through the air with both feet off the ground and studs showing is Johnny Evans. He never even got booked for that attempted assault.

http://www.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http ... A&dur=1561

[LeRouxIsPHat]

And you still think it was a good tackle? Despite this photo? http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/ ... 34x391.jpg So you think a guy with a foot off the ground who went over the ball with studs showing shouldn't be sent off? Get a grip! I obviously won't change your mind on that but your view is actually insane.

Really?

Well i'll see you and raise you this.......Have a look at this photo which proves what I'm saying and also clears Shelvey of malicious intent. This is the 1 reason the young lad is not apologising.

BTW the bloke in white,flying through the air with both feet off the ground and studs showing is Johnny Evans. He never even got booked for that attempted assault.

http://www.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http ... A&dur=1561

So your defence is a photo that shows his studs were up? I've already said that that photo does you no favours and even if it did, are you serious ignoring the other one? Mind boggling.