Having read eventually ( ! ) all the comment there isn’t much left to be said about the incident itself. To sum up where I stand on this is pretty much the anti-over physical and reckless approach to the game.

What occurs to me is that Shawcross is a defender by trade. As are Smith and Taylor too. Despite the limitations on their ability surely they must aspire to be the best and look at what that entails.
All players make bad tackles but defenders and midfielders are expected to be better in a tackle than a forward, however, an intelligent player will mitigate his challenge when it is a lost cause.

If his defensive heroes are Tony Adams or Steve Bould or Martin Keown for example – since these names have been cited here above – then, as said, none of those players potentially ended a career. Hard, borderline dirty and even cynical maybe they were but not malicious and dangerous. Of course, passion in the heat of the moment was and is a factor not to be overlooked when and how it affects our own and the players judgement. I don’t want passion to disappear.

Many might talk about Viera. Personally, I would cite Roy Keane on Alfie Inge Haaland. Never entirely proven as an intentionally malicious foul but the truth is out there somewhere and it very nearly appeared in Keane’s ghost written autobiography. Some might remember the court case at the time about that particular segmant in the book.

So, my point ? Well, aside from blaming the media culture for promoting and setting agendas, the managerial styles and ‘ thuggish tactics ‘ denials, the dressing up of physicality as the English game ? The Pulis’, the Alladyces ? The Browns ? The rest of their ilk ? My point is this, the English game they hold dear and cling onto is just that, a thing clung onto from the past.

Slowly but surely, we will eradicate this supposed British Bulldog mentality from our game or at least its negative aspects, without losing passion on a club level or patriotism at internaional level but channeling the talent into a better way forward. This means hoping that teams who want to play football stay in the Premiership avoid relegation e.g. Burnley, West Brom, Newcastle ( aside from Barton ) , Fulham on previous occasions Hull in their first six months in the Premiership and many more. While Bolton, Blackburn and the like can disappear back to the depths of the leagues and park football where that style may not belong but is best off for now.

. . . and breathe . . .

I have not read the comments of other viewers above but I am going to say only one thing “most tackles, like the one Ryan Shawcross committed, in football are malicious and therefore intentional”. You may disagree, its my view. The only problem here is we cannot get a psychologist to go deep into the mind of perpetrators. If we could, the folly of such statements as “he had no intention to hurt …” would be exposed. The only reason one (a footballer) would use the tricks of “… they do not like it up them” is because it would cause so much pain on the opponent to the extent that they (opponent) would be afraid of coming across and attempt to go past the perpetrator again (cue Jose Antonio Reyes vs the Neville brothers back in 2004). It is used as a deterrent, a painful deterrent!! If your opponent is not going to be deterred, it would not be worth it? Now, tell me, is that not intentional? That means the perpetrator intentionally caused pain on the “opponent” who now has to think twice to go past the perpetrator. To me this “… no intention ..” thing is absolutely nonsense! Most footballers would not agree with my view, just ask Hansen and Shearer and even Arsenal players (they are not angels as everyone knows) or any one that has played football; but that is what would be going on in their minds when they are perpetrating such acts. Do not let them fool you! The first thing is “intention to cause pain”, the next is the extent / level of pain which is dependent on the severity of the injury. Severity of injury will, more often, depend on the amount of force used. Darius, I wrote in your blog last week, that most injuries that Arsenal suffer from opponents in games / matches are caused by malicious tackles from the opposition. These are the kind of tackles I was referring to. They are malicious because, the opponents go with the intention of causing pain. In many cases they are actually premeditated because these oppositions would discuss how to stop Arsenal in their dressing rooms, so do not tell me they did not intend to. If you tackled and took the ball with minimal or no pain, your opponent would not be afraid of you, and therefore will repeat their tricks or find a better trick against you and be able to go past you, and make a good pass or score a goal. This is the footballer’s mind set not only in England but elsewhere, particularly where there is light or no punishment for such acts. Last season, on the same Britannia stadium, Arsenal lost three players, two from serious injuries (Adebayor – by an off-the ball tackle by who else but the “… he is not that sort of …” Ryan Shawcross; and Walcot by a tackle from behind by Delap) and one van Persie for a red card. This time Arsenal has lost two, Ramsey (return date only God knows) as well as Song (for two matches) for something, in the first place was not even book-able, and even if it was, Stoke players (some of whom committed more serious offenses) could not be booked for. Shawcross got away with it last season (he nearly did it again, the referee was reluctant to even to caution him until he saw how serious was) the referee and every pundit and FA and almost every other premier and non-premier league fans applauded his acts. They are supporting him again. No surprise there. Unfortunately, this is not the first time he (Shawcross) has caused such serious injury. Like many gooners have suggested, I wish Arsenal could sue Shawcross and his club, and the referee or if it were possible, the FA for sanctioning the “bullying / kicking / up them” or whatever other name it is called” against Arsenal.

Typical London comment same as Venger ! Beat your wife up comment sums up you Londers in a nut shell ….100 % boring moaning gits. English Premier League yet your teams full of foreigners….tut tut. You eat tripe and talk it too

Quote from Darius:

“The media coverage of this incident is so predictable and sickening. The hacks and pundits and producers of these programmes don’t even recognize that they are the actual problem here”.

Ain’t that the truth! The iZombies simply don’t know – and I bet don’t care either -that they are indeed a substantial part of the problem(s) within English football.

It is clear that Stoke are defending their own player primarily due to the fact that within their own training methods they are encouraging their players to be aggressive, and they also realize there could be some litigation on the way because of the Ramsay injury.

It was clear if you watch the Sky news pictures that the manager of Stoke was more interested in swearing at Fabergas than any concern for the injury to Ramsey. As I mentioned previously, the media have a lot to answer, as SKY news and Sport were more interested in whether Wayne Bridge should shake John Terry’s hand after he had sex with his partner. This really shows you what circus football has become.

I urge all football supporters to write to their clubs concerning the fact that there appears no sportsmanship in the wellfare of players. it’s alright to kick anyone off the park. I would also ask all Arsenal supporters to write to our club and the FA regarding Shawcroft’s previous terrible tackles.

As Arsene Wenger has said, something must be done to stop this fiasco. After all football is a great sport and not a soap opera! Please let’s get our game back as we knew it.

How anyone can read Shawcross’ mind to know that evil was not intended is beyond me. You will cause severe injury 9 of 10 times with that kind of lunging tackle.
This the shame of English football.