pacbuddies Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 (edited) And your point is? That the force of Benteke's little toe forced Terry to not only produce a shit header but clearly broke at least three of his ribs. So your point is that JohnTerry is a W*nk*r! Edited May 11, 2013 by pacbuddies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted May 11, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted May 11, 2013 Doesn't touch him but can you raise a boot like that anymore ? Naive thing to do Benteke is not even looking at him, simply trying to bring down the ball when Terry goes down like you would imagine from that bastion of morals. How is that naive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted May 11, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted May 11, 2013 If you're going to be booking players for that, you'd see 10 a game. He should have been sent off for that. Have to agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Because he's always going to be challenge there Raising his boot that high is naive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Angle of the gif makes it look worse. Video is clearer. http://www.101greatgoals.com/blog/should-christian-benteke-been-shown-a-red-card-for-this-elbow-on-azpilicueta/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted May 11, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted May 11, 2013 (edited) The best bit of the game was the abuse Terry got when he did his hamstring. He deserved everything he got! Edited May 11, 2013 by Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 (edited) Tut tut tut, Christian you silly boy! Cost us the match there! I'll forgive him, as he's been brilliant this season. On to Tuesday night. Wait and see what happens. How the f**k did he cost us the match? Because we were all over them until he was sent off perhaps? Really! There was me thinking that they only had 10 men when Benteke got sent off! Perhaps you are suggesting that we needed the man advantage to beat them although I would remind you that we were winning when it was 11 v 11. Benteke did not cost us the game. Wake up and smell the coffee. Its looks like your eyes are just as good as mine and we can both count. Chelsea are third in the Premiership and through to a European final whereas we have flirted with relegation all season and were dumped out of both cups by lower league opposition so yes we probably did need that man advantage. I'm sure it was just coincidence that Chelsea got so much 'better; when it was 10 v 10 and then went on to win the game. Our defending let us down yet again hence their two goals but I would have put money on Beneteke scoring at least one more taking advantage of playing with more space that a ten man opposition gives you. I share your disappointment as its a game we could have won given how we played in the first half but the simple reality is the game changed as soon as Beneteke was sent off. Benteke getting sent off did not cost us the game. If you argue that it did then I will argue that the referee cost us the game by not sending John Terry off for his elbow on Weimann. You are clearly in the minority blaming Benteke and perhaps it helps you to come to terms with the defeat if you have someone to blame! Hmmm.....you might want scroll through the thread and check that point. Oh and please cut out the cheap digs too, we all support the same club here. Edited May 11, 2013 by Harry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted May 11, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted May 11, 2013 Because he's always going to be challenge there Raising his boot that high is naive Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poitier Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Because he's always going to be challenge there Raising his boot that high is naive Really? The standard had already been set by the foul that Ramirez got his second booking for. He only made contact with gabby on the downswing, nowhere near as high as it initially looked, and gabby was already on his way down at that point. I don't think either deserved to be off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 If you're going to be booking players for that, you'd see 10 a game. He should have been sent off for that. Alan Shearer made a great career and won many plaudits for doing that all the time 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 As for Benteke (and I am only relying on the footage have I have seen on 101greatgoals.com): 1. The elbow is a red card in my opinion. He knows he is being covered at some point and the force from that elbow is just too much. I wouldn't have said anything against that being a red. Not saying it was on purpose or anything like that, but that was more than a natural movement, it was a lot of force involved. 2. The high kick is a bit like Nani in the CL, except the fact that Nani of course struck the player much more direct in the ribs. Both went for the ball and didn't see the player coming in, but the leg is just clumsy high. Nani tried to collect the ball with his feet, thus him having it there, Benteke's was a bit silly since he was heading it. Both situations warranted a yellow card, so I can't complaint about Benteke's one here either. All in all a deserved red card, and just a pitty since he is so important to us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 That's the way I see it. Since the Nani incident refs have gone to town with the high boots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 That elbow is not a booking. Is Benteke supposed to jump with his arms down? Not intentional or malicious. Really? I've only just seen it as I missed the game but on the gif and your vid link that looks like he meant it. Lucky not to have been off for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Not sure Benteke meant the elbow Could be wrong of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poitier Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Not sure Benteke meant the elbow Could be wrong of course He looked for the defender before doing it, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Tut tut tut, Christian you silly boy! Cost us the match there! I'll forgive him, as he's been brilliant this season. On to Tuesday night. Wait and see what happens. How the f**k did he cost us the match? Because we were all over them until he was sent off perhaps? Really! There was me thinking that they only had 10 men when Benteke got sent off! Perhaps you are suggesting that we needed the man advantage to beat them although I would remind you that we were winning when it was 11 v 11. Benteke did not cost us the game. Wake up and smell the coffee. Its looks like your eyes are just as good as mine and we can both count. Chelsea are third in the Premiership and through to a European final whereas we have flirted with relegation all season and were dumped out of both cups by lower league opposition so yes we probably did need that man advantage. I'm sure it was just coincidence that Chelsea got so much 'better; when it was 10 v 10 and then went on to win the game. Our defending let us down yet again hence their two goals but I would have put money on Beneteke scoring at least one more taking advantage of playing with more space that a ten man opposition gives you. I share your disappointment as its a game we could have won given how we played in the first half but the simple reality is the game changed as soon as Beneteke was sent off. Benteke getting sent off did not cost us the game. If you argue that it did then I will argue that the referee cost us the game by not sending John Terry off for his elbow on Weimann. You are clearly in the minority blaming Benteke and perhaps it helps you to come to terms with the defeat if you have someone to blame! Hmmm.....you might want scroll through the thread and check that point. Oh and please cut out the cheap digs too, we all support the same club here. The few posters on here who blame Benteke are hardly a representation of the Villa fan base are they! Oh, there is nothing cheap about my digs, they are all priceless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Terry = word removed Lampard = word removed Referee = word removed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Lampard really isn't a word removed. Great bloke, great player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 He is. He's a right big fat one. Only thing missing from his goal today was the customary celebration in front of opposition fans. He'll be popping up on Sky for ages, him and Redknapp talking about how good all their mates are and not criticising them for errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCAM Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Lampard really isn't a word removed. Great bloke, great player. Agreed. I said today, I wanted Lamps to score, he deserves the record he has set. True professional. Genuinely seemed humbled by the applause he got as he left the pitch. Of course, I wanted us to be 2 goals up when he scored! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts