FA Cup Final: Arsenal v Hull City

First topic message reminder :

Arsenal:
Szczesny; Sagna, Mertesacker, Koscielny, Monreal; Arteta, Ramsey; Podolski, Wilshere, Ozil; Giroud.
Subs: Fabianski (GK), Jenkinson, Rosikcy, Cazorla, Flamini, Oxlaide-Chamberlain, Kallstrom.

Hull City:
McGregor; Davies, Bruce, Figueroa; Elmohamady, Rosenior, Huddlestone, Meyler, Livermore; Aluko, Fryatt.
Subs: Harper (GK), McShane, Chester, Boyd, Quinn, Sagbo, Koren.


Referee: Lee Probert (Wiltshire FA)
Assistant referees: Jake Collin (Liverpool FA), Mick McDonough (Northumberland FA)
Fourth official: Kevin Friend (Leicestershire FA).
Reserve assistant referee: Simon Bennett (Staffordshire FA)

socal1976 wrote:

The Fourth Lion wrote:So, after all the dust has settled, was it really a great cup final, or was it just a decent game that simply got off to a flyer..?

When Hull scored their second goal, all I could think was  "Too soon.... too soon...."   They got a lead and then didn't know what to do with it.  Arsenal's experience on the bigger stages was always likely to enable them to overcome Tiger's flying start.

It's a shame they couldn't hold out but the FA Cup Final can be a cruel theatre.  All that expectation... all that dizzying glory so tantalisingly close and yet, so far away.  

It's unlikely (but not impossible) that Hull will see this stage again.  The hard headed will say that they had their chance and blew it.  That would be a harsh but not unreasonable assessment.  I feel sorry for their fans.  Not the players, the fans.  They're the ones who really care.  

I thought the referee did well to resist the belly-flops of the Arsenal players inside the penalty area.  Players falling to the ground at the merest touch isn't clever and it sure as hell isn't professional by any stretch of the imagination.  It's just cowardly.  Braver men, with more confidence in their abilities, would stay on their feet and try to score goals by their abilities  rather than rely on being cravenly gifted an undeserved free shot at goal from 12 yards.

To these faint hearted cowards I say:  Stay on your feet..!!  Play the bl00dy game..!!

Well done the referee for waving the appeals aside with the contempt they deserved.

The sideshow issues relating to this game.... late kick off / disaster commemoration and any other gubbins the lamebrains can think of only detract from the match itself.   This is the Cup Final.  The game itself should be enough to excite and enthuse every football fan in the country.  What a shame it's now played in a soulless concrete bowl with very little appeal or character.  In the time Wembley Mk II has been opened, nothing of note has happened there.  The Gods of Football have yet to sprinkle magic dust on the place.  The players certainly aren't lighting the occasion up.  None of them seemed especially lifted for the occasion.  I don't think footballers have that in them any more.   It's just another day in the office with a trophy that isn't the Premiership (the only trophy they really.... really.. give a damn about) being handed out at the end.  Post match celebrations appear almost stage managed. Performing monkeys dancing for the cameras.

But all in all, it was a reasonably good game.  Enjoyable, but not that special.   Hull had a lead then lost it and Arsenal scraped home.  

The last time a team came back from 2-0 down to win the FA cup an unknown Cornishman who only played 11 league games for Everton (he ended up at Pompey..!!) made himself a hero that day by stepping out of anonymity to score twice and change the game.  That's a fairy story.  That's what cup finals should be all about.  It also happened in a World Cup year.  1966 to be precise. Now, there's a thought.

So, where are the fairy stories today..?  Simply, there aren't any.   Wigan beating Man City..?  Bah..!!  City didn't turn up.  They didn't want it.  And it was a rotten match.

The FA Cup still has magic but only in the hearts of the fans.  That's where the real emotion is.   They really care and Hull's dared to dream.  They travelled from Humberside in genuine hope and for the hour or so that City led the game, they believed.  Today, many of them are really hurting.   But they'll be back next season.  There's always another season and come the first Saturday in January, they'll be dreaming again.

Thank God for the fans of clubs like Hull City.  Without them, football would have died a death long ago.

Excuse me fourth lion, what are you talking about? Do you think the ref was courageous waving off the penalty where the hull city player volleyballed the ball away with both hands on the football inside the 18 yard line? Was he courageous then or just ravenously incompetent? Last time I checked handling the ball with one hand in the 18 is a penalty kick far be it when volleyball spiking it with two hands. Sorry, tom hundredstone fouled Giroud and Cazorla was fouled two more times in the box. It isn't courageous to foul people in the box and not get called, plenty of neutrals watched that match and thought the referee was incompetent and not courageous I share that opinion. In high school we weren't the most mature lot, we used to trip our friends in the hallway for laugh. Trust me I did it a dozen times it doesn't take a great deal of theatrical kicking to hook a guy's legs and bring him down if you catch him right. And we all played the game we know that if your are moving and cutting at full speed and someone hooks a leg or an ankle you can be superman and still be taken down. Ok if not 4 penalties there were at least, at least, if you want to be English and brave two penalites in that match that weren't called in favor of Hull City. That doesn't take away from their cup run, it isn't an indictment of their fans or their players but it doesn't take a genius or weak kneed continental to conclude that they got a major rub of the green with calls.

Furthermore, I thought the players on both sides, showed a great deal of emotion and respect for the event. Wenger looked like a schoolboy on the day before summer break, did you see the reaction of Arsenal players mobbing Aaron "its not gay if its with" Ramsey when he scored the winner. Did you see the utter desecration of the Hull players when the final whistle blew and they had come up just that much short? I thought it was a great cup final. Yes my team won, but in no way as a neutral watching that event would you feel that cup had lost its appeal or that the players didn't care.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, as am I and I think on this occasion we should agree to disagree.

To respond to your points I think there is plenty to chew on there.  Firstly, with regard to the penalty claims.  Yes, it is a penalty offence to handle the ball inside the penalty area..... under the conditions applied in the Laws of the game (interpretation of the laws) as laid down by FIFA.  I copy directly from those laws and highlight in red the parts I believe are appropriate:

Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with
the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into
consideration:
• the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
• the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
• the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an
infringement
• touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.)
counts as an infringement
• hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) counts as an
infringement


There.... now you've just learned something.

You argue strongly for the award of a penalty in the cup final for handball, but if you look closer at the incident, I think the referee made a correct interpretation of the law under those conditions.  I was a Hampshire FA Referee for seven seasons and had to make similar decisions (albeit at a much lower level of football) on many, many occasions.   I agree with Mr Probert's assessment of that incident.  

May I ask how much refereeing you have done?

The question of how players fall under the lamest of contact is more arguable.  I played far more rugby than football in my playing days.  Mostly as a winger or a centre where I would often find myself carrying the ball at high speed (well, I thought I was quick, anyway).   I would be hammered into by some pretty big bug*ers whose intention, as often as not, bordered on the murderous and still managed to stay on my feet on many of those occasions.  Not so easy when you've got a thumping great flank forward wrapping his arms around your legs, but being barged into, pushed, tripped and occasionally head butted in the process didn't necessarily mean I'd fall to the ground like a theatrical dying swan.

Again, seeing the incidents during the game, I thought the level of "contact" was minimal and those players could have stayed on their feet if they wanted to.  They simply didn't back themselves to score.  They didn't have the daring or audacity to have a proper go.   To me, that implies a lack of certain qualities, such as character and belief in ones own ability.  Of course, they're trying to win the game.  Fair enough, but does the end justify the means..?   Only if you have something lacking in your make up.  The bigger man stays on his feet.  The lesser mortal goes down.  That's how I see it.

I'm often bemused when I see players who are, say, having their jersey pulled whilst running towards the penalty area, stay upright and mobile until they get into the box then all of a sudden, for some strange reason, can no longer keep their balance and "go to ground".   Call me a cynical old so and so if you will (and you may well be right) but again, I side with the official who waves such appeals away.   Lee Probert wasn't fooled or conned by the dying swan act on Saturday and he decided "No pen".  Quite rightly.  In my opinion.

Moving on to the "respect for the event" question, I'm of the opinion that the Arsenal players were more showing relief than outright joy at the final whistle.  Had they lost that game another year without a trophy would have ticked up.  The label of Serial Losers and Underachievers would have stuck just a little more firmly.   No trophy for nine years.... and counting.  Arsene Wenger is a fine and decent chap (even if his eyesight occasionally fails him where incidents involving his players are concerned) and has been under enormous pressure.  That pressure was relieved at the final whistle.  He would have had to have had the emotions of a block of concrete not to make an outburst.

Joy at winning the cup..?  Yeah, to an extent.  Winning a trophy is a joyous occasion but that was in the moment.  Ask any of those players if they would exchange an FA Cup winners medal for the Premiership.  They'd swap it in a heartbeat.  Was there sheer relief at finally winning something..... anything..... in those celebrations..?  You betcha.

Hull's players knew they'd blown their chance.  They know they are unlikely to get to another big occasion match such as this.  They'd had the game almost in the palm of their hands and they blew it.  And they knew it.   Their disappointment, I feel, was more for the continued paucity of their own personal career medal tally and the unlikelihood of now ever adding to it with one of the three major medals in English football.  Somehow, a runners up medal in the Championship doesn't quite cut it in the same way.  The human aspect also, is that they will know they  had let the fans down.  Given them hope but in the end, failed to deliver.  That hurts.

I suspect you will disagree with all I've said.  Fair enough.  But it's interesting how people can see different things when watching the same match.   Perhaps you may consider that the next time you disagree with the referee in any game, especially one involving the team you support.   As Gary Lineker was once quoted as saying:   "The trouble with referees is that they just don't care who wins."    

The difference between Lee Probert and the fans, of course, is that Mr Probert knows the laws of the game and has worked his way up to the highest level of officiating.  That's why he was out there doing the job and they weren't.

And it isn't my opinion, I frankly didn't say squat about the referee till your post lauding him for a job well done. A number of non-Arsenal fans on this forum and others who watched the game and on other sites mentioned the penalty calls. The handball to me clearly showed a player extending his hand out in front of his body and violating the rules. I think many other referees would make that call. As for the Giroud incident I am sorry the guy put a headlock on him and pulled him down and Cazorla was clipped and then knocked down. What is a foul in Rugby isn't a foul in football so I don't see the Rugby analogy. Again it doesn't take a lot to bring you down if you get tripped. I am happy to agree to disagree on the penalty calls. Frankly, there are many officials that would have whistled for fouls, Probert isn't infallible and in my mind and many other commentators he blew the calls in question.

Of course the FA cup is a big event and the players were happy to win it. The feeling of relief at winning especially when being down is common to any big final when the whistle blows. No different today than lets say 50 years ago. No one argues or has argued that it is as big as winning the league or CL. But it is still an accomplishment worth noting and celebrating. The fact remains that one can tell how much this event means by how hard the teams fight and especially how hard the lower ranked teams fight in these matches. Was it the best final ever, but to say that somehow the players didn't care enough or that event has been tarnished or what not is not a conclusion that I drew from watching it.

The rugby comparison is hardly an apples with apples comparison. A lot easier to see off body checks than ankle taps.

Glad that Arsenal won without having to score from a penalty. However that does not mean that there was not a strong case for getting at least one. The Huddlestone on Giroud was the most obvious in my opinion. Huddlestone loses Giroud when the ball is in the air, looks over his shoulder and sees that, then puts his arm across Giroud from behind to stop his progress. Anywhere else on the park a free kick and a yellow card. We see similar every week.

Fourth Lion,

Some of your points are absolutely ridiculous and you're looking at everything in the wrong way. 

Players do go down too easily when they get contact, but the FA Cup final was not the first time this happened and it won't be the last. Unfortunately I think you are just going to have to come to terms with it being part and parcel of the game. It is not just the players' fault either, it has become such a staple that staying on your feet actually puts you at a disadvantage because fouls simply aren't recognised by the referee. 

I don't think it shows anything about the individual if they go down easily in the box when there is contact other than that they are aware of what modern football is actually like, something which seems to have been lost on you. Cristiano Ronaldo would go down if he felt contact in the box, Lionel Messi would go down if he felt contact in the box...do they lack belief? Do they not think they can score? Of course not, it's because they feel fouled so go down unnaturally because it appears that this is the only way to bring the referee's attention to it.

Ask any of those players if they would exchange an FA Cup winners medal for the Premiership.

Of course that is true, but it's a totally moot point. Would Manchester City swap their Premier League medals for a Champions League one? Yes of course they would, that doesn't mean they weren't delighted to win the Premier League, that doesn't mean that their Premier League medal won't be something they will hold with pride. Certain competitions are of course more valuable but that doesn't change the fact that players are still happy to win all competitions. Just like fans are, the Arsenal fans would also swap those medals, so would the Hull fans if they had won the cup. It's such a meaningless point.

I am not sure where you see the difference between Hull's disappointment at not winning the cup and Hull caring about the cup. Of course there would be an individual part where they were disappointed not to gain a winner's medal, but there will also be a disappointment on the behalf of the team for not winning Hull's first ever cup. Surprisingly enough people are capable of different facets of emotion and disappointment, it doesn't have to be black and white.

Just like Arsenal will have been both happy to have ended the trophy drought but also delighted to win the FA Cup. 

I think Saturday showed the Cup still meant a lot to the players as well as the fans, I think it is disrespectful to suggest it isn't.

Calder106 wrote:Glad that Arsenal won without having to score from a penalty. However that does not mean that there was not a strong case for getting at least one. The Huddlestone on Giroud was the most obvious in my opinion. Huddlestone loses Giroud when the ball is in the air, looks over his shoulder and sees that, then puts his arm across Giroud from behind to stop his progress. Anywhere else on the park a free kick and a yellow card. We see similar every week.

I am as well, but I just like to see a well officiated match. Even when my team wins and there is a controversy like that in their favor it leaves a bad taste in my mouth even if we get the rub of the green. And I agree a great deal of fouls that are fouls anywhere else on the field are simply waved off when they occur in the box, to me that isn't a sign of a courageous referee in fact the opposite.

Crimey wrote:Fourth Lion,

Some of your points are absolutely ridiculous and you're looking at everything in the wrong way. 

Players do go down too easily when they get contact, but the FA Cup final was not the first time this happened and it won't be the last. Unfortunately I think you are just going to have to come to terms with it being part and parcel of the game. It is not just the players' fault either, it has become such a staple that staying on your feet actually puts you at a disadvantage because fouls simply aren't recognised by the referee. 

I don't think it shows anything about the individual if they go down easily in the box when there is contact other than that they are aware of what modern football is actually like, something which seems to have been lost on you. Cristiano Ronaldo would go down if he felt contact in the box, Lionel Messi would go down if he felt contact in the box...do they lack belief? Do they not think they can score? Of course not, it's because they feel fouled so go down unnaturally because it appears that this is the only way to bring the referee's attention to it.

Ask any of those players if they would exchange an FA Cup winners medal for the Premiership.

Of course that is true, but it's a totally moot point. Would Manchester City swap their Premier League medals for a Champions League one? Yes of course they would, that doesn't mean they weren't delighted to win the Premier League, that doesn't mean that their Premier League medal won't be something they will hold with pride. Certain competitions are of course more valuable but that doesn't change the fact that players are still happy to win all competitions. Just like fans are, the Arsenal fans would also swap those medals, so would the Hull fans if they had won the cup. It's such a meaningless point.

I am not sure where you see the difference between Hull's disappointment at not winning the cup and Hull caring about the cup. Of course there would be an individual part where they were disappointed not to gain a winner's medal, but there will also be a disappointment on the behalf of the team for not winning Hull's first ever cup. Surprisingly enough people are capable of different facets of emotion and disappointment, it doesn't have to be black and white.

Just like Arsenal will have been both happy to have ended the trophy drought but also delighted to win the FA Cup. 

I think Saturday showed the Cup still meant a lot to the players as well as the fans, I think it is disrespectful to suggest it isn't.

I agree, especially in regards to players being both happy to win and relieved in ending the trophy drought. Why can't they be happy about both. I thought it was a very good match where both sides came out to win. And while it was not the best final I think it was quite an entertaining one. Two of Arsenal's 3 goals were pretty damn good.

The Fourth Lion wrote:I thought the referee did well to resist the belly-flops of the Arsenal players inside the penalty area.  Players falling to the ground at the merest touch isn't clever and it sure as hell isn't professional by any stretch of the imagination.  It's just cowardly.  Braver men, with more confidence in their abilities, would stay on their feet and try to score goals by their abilities  rather than rely on being cravenly gifted an undeserved free shot at goal from 12 yards.

I can't agree with this. I thought Arsenal could have had about four penalties. You shouldn't need to have your legs broken in order to win a penalty. The criteria is simply whether a direct free kick should have been awarded. The handball decision was debatable. However, Cazorla was taken down twice in the area, once from a push in the back, once having his legs taken away by a man going for the tackle.  And Giroud was impeded by a pull from Huddlestone. Whether or not you think the players went to ground too easily is immaterial. In all three of the instances a player was illegally impeded, and, as a result, lost control of the ball. Anywhere else on the pitch, all of those fouls would have drawn a direct free kick.

I can see why the ref didnt give them. I dont think they were stonewall.

The Cazorla one was pretty stonewall.

Which? I thought the tumble over the legs is arguable because the clear touch on the ball. The one in the back probably clearer, but it doesnt help that the man goes down like hes been gored

One in the back. As clear as it gets for me.

what about the other stone wall one when he didn't go down?

and the hands up blocking the shot up target.

I remember 5 pens that could have easily been given.

hulls second goal from a dead ball was also taken from 10 yards in front on the incident.

Arsenals second goal resulted from a corner that wasn't.

and tbh the hull players were seriously lucky not to get more cards - there were pretty aggressive in defence even by English standards.

Badly Refereed game- but the right team won

Thought that was a decent point Myst. Can't fault Hull for being physical, and enthusiastic but they crossed the line a few times. Ref needed to show a few cards.

To me it seems like a lot of people can ref a game when they're sat down, with multiple views in slow motion. Hell, that corner one baffled the commentators for a little while.

In real time I thought it was a clear pen.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To me it seems like a lot of people can ref a game when they're sat down, with multiple views in slow motion. Hell, that corner one baffled the commentators for a little while.

yes we can- but in fairness I normally back the ref's up because of the pressure and the tough job they have. However sometimes you just have to say- badly refereed game. We are not talking about the odd bad decision we are talking about over a dozen.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Which? I thought the tumble over the legs is arguable because the clear touch on the ball. The one in the back probably clearer, but it doesnt help that the man goes down like hes been gored

I thought the tumble over the legs was definite. Davies went for the tackle and Cazorla turned him. Davies touched the ball, but got far more of the man, and got the man first.

If people are having ago at Hull for being to aggressive in a mans game of football, in probably the biggest game of there lifes, then we might as well accept football isn't a mans game anymore.

NickisBHAFC wrote:If people are having ago at Hull for being to aggressive in a mans game of football, in probably the biggest game of there lifes, then we might as well accept football isn't a mans game anymore.

We are going to a hispanic world cup mate- be prepared to see reds and plenty of yellows.

Its a mans game in the championship. But not at the highest level any more!

I think Davies got the ball then Cazorla. I can see why its a foul, but the ref sees that quick and I think it looks fine quick.

I can see why, at least, the tumble over the legs, the handball and the tug by Huddlestone weren't pens. I can understand why you'd see Cazorla go in real time and think he was weak.

I thought the Linesman had a perfect view of the Cazorla incident, so was more culpable then the ref. The Giroud foul was one of those that would be given outside of the box, but rarely in the box. I don't remember the two handballs.

NickisBHAFC wrote:If people are having ago at Hull for being to aggressive in a mans game of football, in probably the biggest game of there lifes, then we might as well accept football isn't a mans game anymore.

Who cares if it is men playing or women playing, if you break the rules it is a foul.

The game has moved on from the times when players could kick lumps out of each other and thankfully so.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:I can see why, at least, the tumble over the legs, the handball and the tug by Huddlestone weren't pens. I can understand why you'd see Cazorla go in real time and think he was weak.

It was a tug (your word) when Giroud was past him. It gave Alan McGregor an easy catch where otherwise Giroud would at least have been challenging for the ball. So why was it not a penalty.

I said I could see why. I am not convinced he'd have got there, I'm not really convinced it would have had any affect on the game so I don't really see the need for a penalty

The rules of the game say it should have been a penalty. It was a foul inside the box. Huddlestone obviously thought he was in a dangerous position or he wouldn't have tugged him.

I take a little stock in common sense and interpretation

Maybe but the fact it was deliberate makes it a penalty for me. He looked, saw Giroud was past him and then impeded him. Not slagging the referee but think he got it wrong on this ocassion.

Calder106 wrote:Maybe but the fact it was deliberate makes it a penalty for me. He looked, saw Giroud was past him and then impeded him. Not slagging the referee but think he got it wrong on this ocassion.

I agree

I can see why and I think it would have been very soft. Arsenal deserved at least one pen anyway, that we can agree on, but it doesnt really matter now

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:I can see why and I think it would have been very soft. Arsenal deserved at least one pen anyway, that we can agree on, but it doesnt really matter now

Is it true you only support West Ham because the cast of Eastenders support West Ham and as a child you grew up watching Eastenders and that made you want to support the same team as your favourite actors?

Really not sure why this debate is going on. Arsenal were always going to win. Its done. Move on.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:I can see why, at least, the tumble over the legs, the handball and the tug by Huddlestone weren't pens. I can understand why you'd see Cazorla go in real time and think he was weak.

How exactly is two arms extended, leaping in the air and hitting the ball with your arm at full stretch not a handball? Cazorla beat the defender after the defender tipped the ball Cazorla was on it again and turned his man. The contact on the ball happened like half a second before. The defender didn't clear it the ball went right back to Santi's feet and he was around the man that is why he tripped him.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

NickisBHAFC wrote:If people are having ago at Hull for being to aggressive in a mans game of football, in probably the biggest game of there lifes, then we might as well accept football isn't a mans game anymore.

Who cares if it is men playing or women playing, if you break the rules it is a foul.

The game has moved on from the times when players could kick lumps out of each other and thankfully so.

Exactly, I find it pretty funny when people claim that Cazorla who had his back to the defender and is all of five foot five and 145 pounds went down to easily when he was blindsided at full pace by a central defender who has 9 inches and 60 pounds on him. I am glad that the game is about technique, speed, and not who can take and dish out the most vicious fouls.