And I was just pointing out that, since you are now happy to applaud our players cheating, you are in no position to complain when someone does it against us. Do you really think that Ian Wright in the studio, or you at home, will be happy to shrug your shoulders and say 'it's just one of those things' when we get knocked out of the World Cup to a similar incident? No thought not! I abhor cheating, and it would appear others on here feel the same, no matter who does it. I have long called for divers to be punished in retrospect - as I believe most people on here did after spit dived against us the other year - but it does rather weaken the argument if we happily applaud our players when they do the same.

I hope that both you and Mr. Wright will be so calm and matter of fact about it should England get knocked out of the competition to a similar bit of play from an opposition. However, I rather think not. Instead we will get months and months of whinging of how 'we were robbed' and calling for lifetime bans for players who cheat, with no-one able to see that we are unable to take the moral high ground if we condone our players doing the same sort of thing?

No, I only managed to watch the first 40 minutes before being called out to work. When I got home Sky were doing their post match analysis - none of the incidents they showed during that featured a wrong decision by the referee, therefore I'm guessing that none of the ref's wrong decisions (they all make them you know) were what you would call game changing. I said that Arsenal should be down to 9 men, as having already been booked Eboue should have been shown a 2nd yellow for his baltent dive. And as for your justification of what he did - does the phrase "2 wrongs don't make a right" mean anything to you. If Arsenal had managed to hang on for a 1-0 win, then Barca would have been cheated, but I doubt that we would have the hysterical over-reaction on here. As I said, whenever English teams lose it's never because they deserve to - we, as a nation, are incredibly sore losers!

I like to think I have a fair understanding of the laws - I am a qualified referee (although maybe that means I don't understand anything about football at all...) The laws talk of denying the player a goalscoring opportunity - not the team. Lehmann did deny Eto'o a goalscoring opportunity and therefore should have been sent off. I'm also not sure you can debate whether or not he meant to do it - as he actually grabbed his ankle, rather than Eto'o's foot catching a flailing arm. So the ref would have been well within his rights to allow the goal and then produce a red card - however, most refs wouldn't do, as without the aid of the slow motion it would have been difficult to assess the intent in Lehmanns challenge. As I've said before the ref acted to the letter of the law, and not neccessarily in the interests of the game as a spectacle - but then refs aren't told to protect the spectacle, they are told to uphold the laws of the game. IMO football in general would be a lot better if refs were told that, since football is an entertainment business, they should act as such. Whenever I ref games (usually under 15/16's) I always make it clear that, barring a leg breaking challenge or something similar, we will end the game with 11v11 - the lads have come to enjoy a game of football and they don't want it spoiled by the referee - FIFA, UEFA and the FA need to realise that in the same way, thousands of people have paid to enjoy a game of football and don't want it spoiled by the referee. But that's really a debate for another time. Back to Wednesday's game, as I said earlier I only saw the first 40 mins or so, but in that time the only major decision that the ref got wrong was allowing Eboue to con his way to a freekick, instead of recieving a 2nd yellow. So Arsenal, instead of being 1-0 up at half time, should have been down to 9 men. None of the other highlights of the game I have seen feature a wrong decision by the referee in Barca's favour, so I don't see where all the complaining has come from. It's always the same though. Whenever, an English team lose, either in the champions league or in an International competition, it's never their fault. It's always because we were cheated - we are the national equivalent of a 5-year-old, who sulks and crys when things don't go his way. Grow up and learn to lose with dignity!!!!!!!!!!

I didn't see all the game - got called out to work just before half-time, but I did catch the post match stuff. I don't get how Arsenal were cheated out of the game. The sending-off, whilst not necessarily being in the best interests of the game as a spectacle, was the correct decision. The Arsenal goal came from a blatent dive - the lad should have been shown a 2nd yellow and sent off, thus reducing Arsenal correctly to 9 men. Instead they kept 10 men on the pitch and went 1-0 up. During the interview with Lehmann after the game, Geoff Shreeves on Sky seemed to intimate that Barca's 1st goal was offside. This was not the case - even Paul Merson addmitted that he was level and therefore on. There was nothing wrong at all with Barca's 2nd goal - except perhaps the defending. So unless I've missed some game changing incident, which Sky didn't bother putting into their aftermatch analysis, then I can't see how Arsenal can complain. The only big decision that was wrong was in their favour.

Or the one against Fulham when Boa Morte, about 4 yards from goal, had to score, but was foiled by Brad. Or the save against Boro' - Viduka's header from a corner - how he got to it I still don't know. I too was equally frustrated at not seeing at least one of Brad's saves in there - especially when they included Robinson's save when it is, at best, debatable as to whether or not he actually got a touch.

Exactly what I thought. When I started watching footy back in about '86 (I'm only a whippersnapper really!) if someone had told me that one day I would see Liverpool play long-ball, kick and rush, ten-men behind the ball and time wasting for most of the 2nd half, I'd have laughed in their face. Bill Shankly must be turning in his grave!

I've voted not bothered either way - but that's mainly because I sit in the Darwen End and don't really hear them anyway. The one time I was forced to sit close to them (at an away game at the Reebok I think) myself and my mate were moved by the stewards to new seats at half-time after my mate had threatened to insert the drumsticks where the sun don't shine if he continued to bang his drum right in our earholes (we were sat literally in front of him.) The big question I have though is this: How do these people get into the ground? There are lists and lists of seemingly harmless everyday items which you are not allowed to take into grounds e.g. flagpoles, plastic bottle lids etc. , yet at almost every ground up and down the country numptys manage to get through the turnstiles with drums, drumsticks, trumpets and a big, heavy metal bell FFS!!! It appears that people mistakenly believe that lots of noise = good crowd. I have a number of friends who support Wednesday, and they all tell me how great their crowd is, how noisy they are, what a great atmosphere there is etc., however, whenever I have ventured down to Hillsborough all I see is about 7 people playing instruments and everybody else sitting in silence - probably wishing they would shut up and clear off home! It's the same with Pompey fans. I had a conversation with one of their fans after the game at Ewood and he claimed that they were the best the fans in the country because they never shut up - however, having sat in the Darwen End I could see about 6 of them singing, 2 banging drums and 1 pillock ringing a bell - the rest sat on their hands, probably wishing the others would shut up and clear off home!! I think what I'm trying to say is that there appears to be a minority of people who wish to spoil the enjoyment of others who have paid to see a game of football and who don't wish to have a drum, bell or any other kind of instrument played anywhere near them, and the clubs are aiding them in this by allowing them to bring these items into the ground. My soloution - ban all kinds of musical instruments from football grounds and lets get back to having proper atmospheres generated by lots of grown men shouting and singing themselves hoarse! You know it makes sense!!

In just the same way as the Utd fans at Ewood the other week sang "Let him die, Let him die" as Savage was lying injured on the floor, being prepared to go on the stretcher. Funnily enough though that never made it onto the back pages of a national newspaper, unlike the chants from the scousers yesterday which are on the back page of the mirror.

It's not a persecution complex - I don't think that refs are out to get us. I do think that often they favour the 'bigger' clubs, but then most people are of the same view. (Heard a number of ex-players express the same view whilst working as media pundits) The point I was making is that Rio could quite easily have been sent off - it was retaliation which is supposed to be a straight red. I used Todds head pushing with Reid against Spurs to illustrate my point but I could quite easily have used many other examples - Rooney's slap of the Bolton player last year, or Villa's Lee Hendrie against City last year when he moved his head toward Danny Mills but didn't make any contact. The red wasn't overturned - why? Because it was deemed as retaliation which is a straight red offence no matter how serious the contact (or lack of it)

You're having a laugh right? A booking was the least he deserved for it. He thrust his knee into Pedersens leg whilst he was getting up - it wasn't accidental, it was malicious and completely unnecessary. I would say it was on a par with Todd's indiscretion against Spurs earlier in the seaon for which he served a 3-match ban (if memory serves me right) Dowd, imo, actually bottled out of making a tough decision by just booking Rio when he should have been sent off straight away. We just got lucky in that Rio was stupid enough to commit another horrendous challenge just minutes later leaving the ref with no option - although had Savage's injury been any worse it would have a tough price to pay for Phil Dowd's cowardice.

Another disgraceful refereeing performance at Ewood against Man Utd. Why do the refs always send off our best players?? RIO RIO

Just when I thought last nights victory couldn't feel any sweeter - up pops Fergie to demonstrate how to accept defeat graciously I heard his comments last night and one in particular has me confused - he mentioned Todds 'terrible' challenge on Richardson which he apparently should have got booked for - I've racked my brains trying to think of the incident he's referring to but honestly can't - can anyone else or was it just a figment of his imagination??

I'm not sure anyone was arguing that it was handball - the ball clearly strikes Todds arm and therefore prevents Beattie a run on goal - a free-kick was rightly awarded. What most people, myself included, thought was that for it to warrant a red card the ref has to be 100% certain that it was intentional and after having seen numerous replays from all different angles and at all different speeds I can't honestly say whether it was intentional or not, so how the ref could be sure I don't know. Under Mr Halseys rules Repka could have been sent off today. He jumped with his arms fully outstretched and the ball hit one of them. A clear penalty, but if it had not done so the ball would have travelled into the Wham 6-yard box where we had a couple of players waiting. A possible goal-scoring opportunity. I'm not saying he should have been sent off, or even booked, I do think it was a penalty though and I think Todd was very hard done to. Don't necessarily agree with the conspiracy theory, but do feel that Carroll was very lucky. Pedersen carried on after the whistle as he obviously hadn't heard it, however Carroll was able to see that the game had stopped and went out, IMO, to 'do' Morten. I sit in the DE and you could see Carroll getting more and more frustrated after we had gone 3-2 up at what he saw as our time-wasting. I believe that he went out to hurt Pedersen in that challenge as a kind of revenge for what he may have seen as more time-wasting.

Savage didn't have a great game last night, but then, as has already been pointed out, neither did the majority of players in blue n white - but the thing with Sav is that even when he isn't having a great game he still gives 100% and never goes missing which is all you can ask. I took a non-rovers supporting mate with me last night and he was completely baffled as to why Savage had been taken off. Personally I believe that he was taken off because he is the deeper of the two midfielders when Reid plays and Hughes at that point was looking to go gung-ho all-out attack for the last 15 minutes so it makes sense to take off your defensive midfielder. Also, as an aside, at one point last night Bellamy took a fairly clear dive in the penalty area to try and win us a penalty and then later on picked up a yellow card for dissent - funny I haven't seen any posts demanding him removed from the team or calling him an embarrassment to the club. But then he doesn't have long blonde hair does he?

I was once nearly run over by Kevin Gallacher as he was pulling out of Kwick Fit and I was walking to college in Blackburn. Also met Souness in a gym just outside Derby when he was still our manager - we'd just played Derby in the FA Cup and were playing Nottingham Forest at the weekend - he had legs like tree trunks!! And I still live across the road from Kevin Davies - I think he's recently become a father as I see him pushing a pram around a lot. I remember that in the close season just after we'd been relegated I was stood at the bus stop and watched him flicking the ball up and volleying it into the goals that he has in his garden. I saw him do it 7 times, but he only scored once - I knew we were in for a bad season that year!!! Also, not Rovers but hey, I used to play in the same pub team as Carlo Nash (Prestons keeper) before he signed for Clitheroe and then a year later for Palace. Also went out with his sister for a short time when I was young.

The point(s) you seem to be missing are: 1) It's their money and so they can spend it as they please. Just because you could afford to give the beggar at the end of the road £100, does it mean you have to?? 2) Who else do you want to come in? If there were a queue of muti-millionaires waiting to invest in the club I might well back your stance, but there isn't. Nor is there likely to be any time soon, so we have to accept what we have. Driving the trust out of the club, with no alternative backer in place, would be finacial suicide and, if you are as big a fan as you say, you wouldn't want that!!

Hear, hear. 318592[/snapback] Yeah like we are overwhelmed with british talent Friedel USA Neill Australia Nelsen New Zeland Todd English Matteo Jock ( non talent) Tugay Turkey Reid Irish Pedersen Norway Emerton Australia Mokena South Africa Dickov Jock also add into that Gresko, Encklmen, Johnson 318611[/snapback] Fair point, was thinking about this after complaining about Liverpool's lack of British talent. We usually field at least five British players in our eleven. 1) Gray or Matteo or McEveley 2) Todd 3) Savage or Flitcroft 4) Reid 5) Dickov or Stead or Gallagher That sometimes becomes six if Thompson starts ahead of Emerton. There's a big difference between two and five or six which I actually think is the right sort of blend. I still can't really see how the neutral British soccer fan can be expected to be any more excited about the current Liverpool outfit achieving success than say someone like Deportivo La Coruna. To the extent it was a stirring comeback and a triumph for the underdog then yes it represented everything that was good about the game. Again not something necessarily associated with the Liverpool of the last few seasons. 318626[/snapback] There have been games when we have played no English players at all this season! wake up mate! so by your logic- you wouldnt want Rovers to even win 1 game because of having hardly any English people 318635[/snapback] I don't think that was the point (unless I've completely misunderstood!). Obviously we would all support our team regardless of how many English/non-English players we have. But the number of foreigners in a team does matter when it is supposedly a question of patriotism to support an 'English' club. So, put simply, would I support Rovers if we fielded a completely foreign 11? Yes. Would I expect the rest of England to support that same team? No, why should they??

Wonder if the 26 fouls committed by both of the Uniteds yesterday is worthy of comment in todays press - or do those extra 2 make all the difference!!

42 fouls in total in our game - 28 by us, 14 by Arsenal 52 in todays game - 26 each But remember, it's not the facts that matter - the press say that we are a dirty, over-physical, cynical bunch of hackers and so that's good enough for me!!!

The reason for the negative stuff against us is clear from the people atricle: They all want a Utd - Arsenal final so that they can churn out the usual tired old drivel instead of having to actually bother thinking of something new to write!! (Incidentally, how they can say that that is the final that the whole country wants is beyond me. The number of Utd fans is surely outnumbered by the number of ABU's and I would imagine that the same is true of Arsenal as well!) I was at a wedding yesterday and so had the misfortune of having to listen to the game on 5-Live. The absolute bias throughout the match commentary was typified by the comment "What we really need now is for Arsenal to score" about 30 seconds before their first goal. How a supposedly neutral commentator (paid for by mine and yours License fee incidentally!!) can be so openly willing one team to score is beyond me. One more thing that got me - in pointing out all our bad challenges, both on the radio and on MOTD last night, they seemed to miss the challenge from Viera on Reid, a tackle from behind on the edge of the box, a clear booking if ever I saw one. And (just MOTD) there was nothing said about the worst tackle of the day - Nigel Quasie on Darius Vassell from the Southampton - Villa game. It would appear that unless you play for Rovers you are incapable of committing a bad tackle!!

So if someone only attends one game (for instance the cup game against Burnley) putting approx £20 into the club, they should be given priority over someone who attends a minimum of 19 games putting in over £300 for the season?? Doesn't make sense to me - season ticket holders get rewarded for putting a lot of money into the club - it is, as someone has already said, one of the few perks of being a season ticket holder - don't forget we miss out on cheaper tickets when the club decides to do a special promotion.

I guess I must be an 'excuse maker'. I would love to go to the semi - regardless of time, money, distance etc. - however, my cousin is getting married on that day - an event planned for the last 18 months and I can't really get out of it. But I am a season ticket holder and have been to every cup game so far this season, including Cardiff away, and you can bet your life that I'll be first in queue when final tickets go on sale. It's a strange thing, but for every game so far in the run, people who attend a specific game think that they should be more entitled to tickets than other fans - but not every fan can go to every game - and it is not always just personal choice not to attend. That is why the club - on the whole - get it right. They reward season ticket holders as they generally attend every home league game, and I suspect for the final, they will require a minimum of 2 cup game ticket stubs, thus ensuring that people who have attended some cup games get first choice over those that haven't been to any - but to suggest that going to one game (irrespective of distance and inconvenience caused) should get you that priviledge is nonsence.

Just had a gander at the BBC site and found these quotes: Never heard so much ###### in all my life!! With who??? Not fans from any of the 4 clubs involved it's not! Have they??? Doesn't seem like they've fans travel arrangements into consideration at all!! It'd funny if I wasn't so flaming furious!!!

Why? How have we, or any other club (except for Chelsea), benefitted from Chelsea's win last night?