Join the best football forum online!

Rate Your Player is the best football forum online. So why not join, create and debate with thousands of fans today!

Login   Sign Up Now


Chelsea Forum   ·   43 comments

Chelsea v FA


Chelsea lose yet again. FA strikes again. #BunchOfTwats

Added by member

Jonevarro by Jonevarro (LEGEND)
Best Crypto Dividends Banner

AFC_Harry34 · Arsenal fan

Ramires rightly banned for 4 games. Can't argue with that can you? Elbowed Larsson! Dirty tw@t

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Doozers20 · Man Utd fan   In reply

@Jonevarro on a site I looked at, a 'bad decision table' if you will, Liverpool sat 4th if it weren't for the bad decisions, so yeah... Big difference if that was accurate, though for me it's all down to perception... But with the bad luck I noticed Liverpool have (and I have no reason to be biased) I could see that being the case

Forgot about the Eto'o challenge against Liverpool, so you're saying Chelsea dropped 6 points from 'incompetent refs', well they gained 4 from the same so this means Chelsea dropped 2, and this is just off the top of my head/

Complete and utter bias and ignorant of decisions Chelsea have had... Big teams should be able to beat bottom clubs even if the ref is slightly against them, Ba had a massive chance and fluffed it.

Chelsea can hide behind the refs all they like, the fact is they weren't good enough to score 2 against 11 men, and your messiah made a massive blunder in sending Chelsea's best striker to Everton, and they're being found out for this.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@releasethekraken Would have been them down to 10 and a penalty chance to score. Would have completely changed the game.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

releasethekraken · Liverpool fan   In reply

@Jonevarro but you might have missed that???? please stop crying mate you're embarrassing yourself.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@releasethekraken No because it was a blatant penalty on Ramires to prevent a goal scoring opportunity.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

releasethekraken · Liverpool fan   In reply

@Jonevarro ummm you still only scored once last night, you still would've drawn if the penalty wasn't awarded and super fabio hadn't scored the winner. go and pick up your toys and put them back into the pram, you're making a mess.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@releasethekraken Larsson shouldn't have been on the pitch in the first place. The Ramires one Reid has already admitted he took Ramires out. Eto'o kicking Suarez is the only one that was unfair and changed the result (possibly). It's what the decisions mean that is significant. You not getting decisions and finishing 7th/8th means little compared to a team not getting decisions and finishing 2nd/3rd. We've been screwed over by both the Villa and Sunderland games. 6 points dropped that we wouldn't have with a competent ref. 6 points is huge.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

releasethekraken · Liverpool fan

Hahahaaaaaaaaaaa. i don't think it was a penalty to be fair but still, to claim such conspiracies is hilarious. what about ramires slapping larsson? what about the ridiculous penalty that preserved mourinho's home record against west brom? what about eto'o kicking suarez in december and howard webb staring at it and saying no?? so, clearly the refs are in fact on chelsea's massive payroll.

and to suggest that liverpool get the luck... i mean. wow. how times have changed. we've been absolutely shafted over the last 3 years by refs for some reason. can't deny that. all the penalties suarez should have had, so much sh!t against us. i've been saying for months on here that we're due some luck. and we've got some in the second half of the season. they've started giving us penalties at last. but still not that many shockers in our favour. i did predict it - as soon as we start doing well again and become relevant we'll start getting decisions. and now the conspiracy theories start. it's brilliant.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Doozers20 · Man Utd fan   In reply

@Jonevarro no I'm saying they don't slide under a players feet to block.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@Doozers20 accidental +vote. You're suggesting players don't slide to block shots/crosses even though they don't make contact with the player? (The player made contact with him)

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Doozers20 · Man Utd fan   In reply

@Jonevarro sliding awfully close to block anything.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@Doozers20 he was sliding in to block a cross/shot. And altidore made contact with him, big difference.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Doozers20 · Man Utd fan   In reply

@Jonevarro he was sliding in nowhere near the ball and made contact with the left leg

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@Doozers20 and his left leg towards Azpi in a non natural movement... If I go out of my way to stand on a player it doesn't mean they've fouled me... We clearly have very different opinions on what is a penalty. Altidore stepped on Azpi unnaturally therefore Azpi gets punished. Makes sense!

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Doozers20 · Man Utd fan   In reply

@Jonevarro he was moving his right leg towards the ball.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@Doozers20 changing direction? The ball was travelling in a straight line... I can't even, I'm lost for words. Even my Spurs supporting best friend (who hates chelsea) admitted it was never a pen.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Doozers20 · Man Utd fan   In reply

@Jonevarro all I see is him changing direction and being tripped.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

http://giant.gfycat.com/BetterWaryConey.gif - clearly not a penalty.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@Doozers20 it's on twitter, they ask on there and you tweet yes or no depending on if you agree and it shows who said yes and no...

  ·     ·     ·   5 years

Jonevarro · Chelsea fan

@IanRush Irony when you call me a child yet 99% of your posts on here are to insult someone or belittle. Irony at it's finest.

  ·     ·     ·   5 years