Responding to this article:
Football Editor/Louise Taylor:
If you had hoped to write an article commending Alan Pardew with regard to his halftime talk, well done. The two-sentence paragraph which you have written is a superb documentation of his efforts. However, if your intention was to criticize Arsene Wenger's refusal to agree that the match was a good advertisement for football, you have failed.
The headline for your article describes Wenger as "One-eyed", but I would suggest that any writer so careless with their reporting of the events which transpired should be the one earning such a moniker.
You certainly have your right to your opinion with regard to the challenge on Diaby by Barton. Equally good arguments can be made on either side of the issue, and you have made your opinion clear with your highly edited version of the incident. However, leaving out important facts as a means of supporting your criticism of Wenger is an effort more commonly associated with either an amateur or a propagandist. Diaby shoved Nolan AFTER Nolan shoved Diaby. On the field, Dowd awarded a yellow card to Diaby for that push, and added to the yellow card for his neck grab, got him sent off. Nolan was not punished.
Your description of another Nolan escapade was equally "myopic". His headlock on Szczesny (see attached pic), which you so politely refer to as a "hefty" shove before dismissively claiming the keeper was petulant in refusing to return the ball to Barton. Excuse me, but the ball belongs to Arsenal in that instance and Nolan again displayed the same behavior as Diaby earlier. It is certainly correct for Wenger to expect equal application of the laws of the game.
To claim that Wenger does not "see the big picture" is ironic, considering that while you may enjoy the thrill of a big comeback, you do not mind seeing it accomplished at the expense of abandoning the concept of fair play. Your view is akin to that of a self-professed racing fan who is actually more excited when viewing accidents than actual skill behind the wheel.
As an Arsenal fan I am disappointed we only earned one point, rather than three, from the game, and I do not for one minute begrudge the joy Newcastle fans must feel following their comeback. However, the inept display by Dowd (even you concede that errors were made) has me worried for the game. The quality of play by Arsenal in the first half, the determination of Newcastle in the second half, and the amazing long range strike to equalize, should be memorable, but the intervention of the referee erased all of that. He was the amateur on the pitch, his failings on display for all to forever associate with the English game.
So, it is left to you and all of the sports reporters out there, to see "the big picture". This is a league you want to promote as the best in the world. This is a league which you hope will attract the greatest players. Yet, articles are written chastising managers for simply asking that fair play is enforced. Articles are written celebrating a match that, had it taken place in South America or the Middle East or Asia, would have us laughing at the ineptitude of the officiating, or scratching our heads wondering what type of corrupt forces were at work.
Every player knows the rules of the game. If everyone played by the rules no referee would be necessary. The official is on the pitch to ensure that the rules are followed. When that official, entrusted by the League, by the teams, by the players and by the fans, no longer follows the rules, nothing good can come of it. Wenger is absolutely correct in his belief that this match was not a "peerless advertisement for the English game".
Victoria Concordia Crescit
