Darren Norris
It wasn’t exactly a surprise but that didn’t make any less distasteful. Aaron Ramsey was jeered and booed by Stoke fans throughout the 73 minutes he played in Arsenal’s 1-1 draw at the Potters. His crime? Having his leg broken by Ryan Shawcross, the Stoke defender, two years ago. It’s hard to understand and impossible to justify that type of behaviour. Nobody, for instance, would taunt someone for getting injured in a car crash yet it is somehow deemed acceptable, as banter even, to jeer a player who suffered a career threatening-injury due to an act of gross recklessness from an opponent.
“I don’t think that you can be proud to boo Aaron Ramsey,” Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger said of the Welshman’s treatment. “I don’t see what he has done wrong in his behaviour but that’s an old story where the fans of Stoke stand behind their player, it shouldn’t go as far as booing Aaron Ramsey though.”
Wenger’s opposite number Tony Pulis claimed he didn’t hear the home fans booing Ramsey. ‘ ‘I was more concerned about the Arsenal supporters booing Shawcross so I didn't hear the ones on Ramsey.’’ Selective deafness is, I think, what it’s known as.
It has been suggested that Ramsey’s treatment was not due to the horrific injury in February 2010 but his refusal to accept Shawcross’s subsequent apology for the incident.
“I have made efforts, I’ve left him messages and a text, and nothing has been returned but that’s up to Aaron,” Shawcross said after the incident. “I haven’t spoken to him. It’s up to him whether he gets back to me.”
Ramsey chose not to. That’s his choice. Despite what Stoke supporters might feel it was Ramsey, not Shawcross, who was the victim in the affair. Ramsey was out of football for the best part of a year and has arguably has not yet and perhaps never will recover properly. Shawcross served a three-match ban. Stoke can’t seriously argue that they were the wronged party.
Ramsey’s behaviour since the injury has been impeccable. He hasn’t lashed out, he didn’t call for a lifeline ban, he simply chose not to accept an apology from a player who almost wrecked his career and few would or could argue with the measured view of the incident he articulated in April 2010.
‘‘I don’t believe he wanted to break my leg, but I think he wanted to go through both the ball and me – to take me out and make sure I felt the tackle,’’ Ramsey explained. ‘‘He was caught out of position a little, but he could definitely have changed his mind before making the tackle, realising he wasn’t going to get there and so not committing. If I was tackling and I saw that there wasn’t a chance of getting to the ball cleanly I wouldn’t make the tackle – and I don’t think there was a chance of him getting there.’’
Replays bear Ramsey’s version of events out. It was not a 50-50 challenge. Unless Ramsey ran out of the way Shawcross was never going to get to the ball. Ramsey’s assessment of what happens means it’s perfectly reasonable that he wouldn’t accept Shawcross’s apology. Ramsey has tried to move on from the incident and rebuild his career.
He deserves encouragement and respect, not derision and abuse.
Source: http://feeds.examiner.ie/~r/iesportsblog/~3/dMI7n-dfH18/post.aspx
Simon Cowell Regulators North-west Democrats Food and drink Newspapers & magazines
No comments:
Post a Comment