Thomas Partey - the footballer: Page 2 - The Arsenal discussion community: One More in the Tolly

Thomas Partey - the footballer

Coombs

Hear, hear, burnsy. We should burn this thread from the server if possible - makes the whole situation much worse, not better.

I can't find the logic in boycotts anymore, from a political perspective. There's too much to boycott and too little to gain. I'm not going to quit watching Arsenal over this, but I respect the choice of anyone who does. There are personal dimensions to being a supporter, and no universal morality, whether legal or spiritual, takes precedence.

But nobody gets to be exempt, you are who you are, you don't get to pick and choose what actions count and which don't - the world does not subdivide so cleanly. This conversation is revealing in that sense. However, it isn't necessarily even the disappointing opinions that are being expressed, but rather, that we are platforming the conversation in this dualistic fashion. It makes me queasy, because I think it reflects very poorly on us as a community.

For the sake of the character and conventions of this forum, I hope that this bad-faith duplicate thread is locked as soon as is convenient for our mods.

Tam

Claudius wrote:
Nobody is saying sweep this under the rug. I am happy for us to have an open TP4 channel. We can even pin at the top of Arsenal forum if we want so that we can share case updates, and any meaningful protests.

I am not interested in coming here to listen to people moralizing. Honestly, I do not give a shit about that. If you are moralizing, please also back that with "I wrote a letter to Vinai about how distasteful I find all of this." But if you are going to come here and spout of at Jazz, Claudius and other fans for being part of the problem and you're not at the forefront of keeping rapists out of football, then please give it a rest.

I don't have the time, energy or influence to keep rapists out of football. I mostly don't even have the time to post here, though I read it almost every day and with it being a small community we all have some influence and a voice here. To suggest people can't comment on issues such as this without sending letters to club management is downright stupid.

Whether you like it or not, you're attitude is part of the problem. We're all culpable of overlooking the issue in that we're not taking the action Klaus did, but it's not black and white, and Partey is not Arsenal. You said it yourself about compartmentalising. There is a difference though between acknowledging, 'accepting' the situation as it, calling it out for being wrong and letting justice run it's course, and consciously overlooking it to praise or discuss the positive points of the footballer. If you're willing to overlook the issue in order to discuss the individual's footballing merits, you are part of the problem.

JazzG wrote:
Everyone wants to be a social justice warrior nowadays, get ahead of the curve...What does worry me is this mentality also means if the police says he has no charge to answer for some they won't go back on their view either. Nobody is absolving Partey of anything but nowadays people want to take a side even when you don't know the full facts.

The thing is, it is common knowledge a lot of football players have very scummy and questionable behaviour. This hasn't happened recently either, where young people get exposed to fame, money and girls it brings the worse out in people. That said these footballers also attract a particular type of women as well, many of whom aren't exactly model citizens themselves. Despite knowing this many of us still choose to watch football. What our players do in their private lives does not concern me, unless it is illegal of course.

........

Social Justice Warrior, those who go around preaching to others about what is right and wrong. Evidence doesn't matter to some, all that matters is if you're not with them then you're against them.

........

Unless I'm missing something has all the evidence been released?

Let's put aside the SJW nonsense and focus on the evidence. We'll likely never know the full extent of evidence. As with the vast majority of sexual assault cases this likely won't ever make court because the evidence might not be strong enough to get a conviction. As Burnsy outlined elsewhere this is already one of only a small percentage where the complainant has reported it. In the vast majority of instances where the crime occurs and it can't be proven beyond doubt in court, as is potentially/likely the case with Partey, are you suggesting we should then move on and ignore it despite any evidence we are aware of? The evidence is there for those who wish to see it, you're choosing to ignore it because you had a mate experience an unfortunate situation. It's not wrong to wish to see more evidence, it is wrong to ignore what has already been made public with the excuse that you don't have all the facts.

What if it goes to court and there is overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing by Partey that would pretty much convince any reasonable member of the public he is guilty, but the defence manages to establish some reasonable doubt with the jury? Or if his defence managed to get him off on a technicality despite it being clearly beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty? In those circumstances a court would declare him not guilty. Where do you stand on that?

I won't go back on my view of Partey. I don't need a jury's view of reasonable doubt to help me in making that decision.

jones

Think you're wasting your breath here Tam. The fact his response to this case - while acknowledging of not knowing even the evidence that was available online - was "everyone wants to be a SJW" shows Jazz has already made up his mind.

JazzG

Tam wrote:
Whether you like it or not, you're attitude is part of the problem. We're all culpable of overlooking the issue in that we're not taking the action Klaus did, but it's not black and white, and Partey is not Arsenal. You said it yourself about compartmentalising. There is a difference though between acknowledging, 'accepting' the situation as it, calling it out for being wrong and letting justice run it's course, and consciously overlooking it to praise or discuss the positive points of the footballer. If you're willing to overlook the issue in order to discuss the individual's footballing merits, you are part of the problem.

I'm not overlooking any issue nor am I absolving him what he may of done. All I'm saying is why don't we let the full facts be looked at first?

Tam wrote:
Let's put aside the SJW nonsense and focus on the evidence. We'll likely never know the full extent of evidence. As with the vast majority of sexual assault cases this likely won't ever make court because the evidence might not be strong enough to get a conviction. As Burnsy outlined elsewhere this is already one of only a small percentage where the complainant has reported it. In the vast majority of instances where the crime occurs and it can't be proven beyond doubt in court, as is potentially/likely the case with Partey, are you suggesting we should then move on and ignore it despite any evidence we are aware of? The evidence is there for those who wish to see it, you're choosing to ignore it because you had a mate experience an unfortunate situation. It's not wrong to wish to see more evidence, it is wrong to ignore what has already been made public with the excuse that you don't have all the facts.

I'm not ignoring anything that has been made public but I simply refuse to

Tam wrote:
What if it goes to court and there is overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing by Partey that would pretty much convince any reasonable member of the public he is guilty, but the defence manages to establish some reasonable doubt with the jury? Or if his defence managed to get him off on a technicality despite it being clearly beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty? In those circumstances a court would declare him not guilty. Where do you stand on that?

If it goes to court and the evidence is published I'll come to my own conclusion then. If there is reasonable doubt that Partey has done this I'd be shocked if Arsenal hadn't suspended him by now.

If he gets off on a technicality or the evidence overwhelming shows he is guilty but manages to wiggle out then he is a rapist as far as I'm concerned.

Tam wrote:
I won't go back on my view of Partey. I don't need a jury's view of reasonable doubt to help me in making that decision.

With all due respect that is your choice to come to a decision, I won't base mine just from one girl releas

Gurgen

I may not have stopped watching Arsenal but I did freeze Partey out in FM2023 and sold him to Utd, while talking shit about him in every press conference where he came up. Do I get some SJW points for that?

Coombs

😆 don't be such a woke sheep, gurgen.

Clrnc

How the hell did he suddenly put in this speed? I wowed in real time

est

He's like the opposite of Denilson in many ways.

Bring Back Kerrea Gilbert

Turned on his 2002 Vieira then. Unreal.

JazzG

Actually thought he wasn't really on it yesterday, his passing seemed off.

Gurgen

Unpopular opinion probably but I think we can do better than Partey the footballer (leaving Partey the vile person aside). If we want to be a world class team we need someone in there who thinks faster and passes faster. In most games it's not required but against quality press like United yesterday he comes up short. Same goes for Xhaka, who we also need to replace if we want to make the step up to that next level. I'm sure there are some guys in Spain who fit the bill.

Claudius

Gurgen
Really disagree with this. The only CM playing at this level is Rodri. Partey has amazing distribution and retention. Very brave. And yesterday showed his speed with how he just tracked down Antony on the break to kick the ball out for a corner.

JazzG

I agree we will need to find an improvement on both players. But that will be easier said than done. Both this season have been at an incredibly high level. With Partey I'm sure we can find a better passer but also need someone who can defend at minimum as well but ideally better. Any suggestions? We've recently been linked to Zubimendi but he doesn't want to move this window, don't know too much about him.

With Xhaka I think his mentality has been key as well, we will find technically better players but would they be leaders on and off the pitch for us as well? We have seen with Zinchenko a difference mentally strong players have made and I think Xhaka has been key in that regard as well.

Clrnc

JazzG Been awhile since I watched la Real consistently but did my research on Zubimendi and realised he's been one of La Liga's standout performer this season. Plays as a single pivot in a diamond, very intelligent in transition and short passes. Like Rodri/Busquets. Weakness is his slightly smaller frame.

Looks like a better Rice.

MistaT

Claudius yeah, I'm with you Claude.

I actually think Partey slowing it down has benefits. First, you can tell other teams don't want to step to him as he's so press resistant. In turn, you see the defense of other teams actually become flat footed in front of him, which then lets him bypass them with a pass around them. It also helps us have the correct shape in receiving the pass from him. Were he to play it faster we'd have to shorten our spacing, and play more tiki-taka inspired (tight between players) which isn't what we're excelling at (spreading teams, creating 2v1's).

QuincyAbeyie

Casemiro is probably the best CM in the league this season (unless Ødegaard is a CM I guess), but I agree that finding an improvement on Partey will be almost impossible.

Claudius

Casemiro is substantially better as a defensive force. But he doesn’t have the playmaking ability of Partey. And given how front footed we are, Partey is the more appropriate player for us

Clrnc

Claudius Don't agree here, Casemiro passing between the line and distribution is very underrated. So is his shot prowess too.

He is basically the best DM for the past decade.

Claudius

Both men are fantastic but I believe on this specific team Partey works better than Casemiro would. These are the key differences.

Defensively, Casemiro is the much better tackler, more physical. Partey is stronger and interceptions and reads the game really well, probably a result of years of zonal defense under Simeone.

On offense, more nuanced. Partey is more suited for our offense because he is more comfortable on the ball. So he is able to attract defenses and do short progressive passes, creating quick advantage for us. He does this faster and more accurately. Where Casemiro is better is the long range Xhaka style distribution.

So it depends on what you are doing. If I’m 2020 Liverpool, I take Casemiro because he can better put the ball into the wings and lead the second line of the press. If I’m 2020 City, I take Partey because he can progress to KDB and Gundo better.

QuincyAbeyie

Regardless, it was in response to you saying that Rodri was the only CM at his level.

« Previous Page Next Page »