Premier League Manager in Aggressive Play Admission

In an article on Sky Sports (that you can't comment on, incidentally), there is an interview with Owen Coyle, here .
 
Owen Coyle has waded into the row about Arsenal being targeted for rough treatment. I'm going to call him out here for deliberately trying to manipulate the discussion.

Who Says?
 
Coyle said, "There is no way in the world that anyone would go out to intentionally hurt or maim any player."
 
This may be an accurate statement, but nobody at Arsenal (including the vast majority of fans) is making that claim.

In fact I have seen a few tackles where the tackler had hatred and anger written on their face, implying violent intention, which calls his statement a lie. Fortunately, however, such tackles are extremely rare, and it's clear the Shawcross tackle wasn't in that category.
 
Coyle goes on: "Ramsey is a terrific talent and is going to be a top player but there's no way that was intentional to hurt him."
 
Again Coyle seems to be making an argument against a claim that nobody was making.
 
He then goes on to say, "If you're not motivated to go out there and be aggressive to begin with, to earn the right to play, then you're going to be run over the top of and made to look foolish."

Aggressive

So he's saying you have to be aggressive, and implying that it's hurt or be hurt. That seems an accurate interpretation. He's saying you have to be aggressive to earn the right to play. I can only say that's such an incredible argument I find it difficult to believe any manager could say it.

If you replaced the word "aggressive" with the word "committed," I could appreciate the sentiment—but aggressive?

Nobody wants a non-contact sport; and everybody, including Arsenal fans, appreciate commitment. But aggression is a step too far. 
 
Coyle further expands this with, "We all take pride in trying to make our players competitive, to go and earn the right, as we say in football, but there's no way you'd say 'Go and smash this and that'."
 
Clearly nobody would expect a manager to give specific instructions to his players to "go and smash someone ." That would come out and the manager's career would be finished. Nobody is claiming that those kinds of instructions were given.

Again, Coyle is arguing against something nobody's claiming. However telling your players to go out and be aggressive with an opposing team is clearly exactly what Coyle would do as his previous statement demonstrates.
 
Notice that Coyle is perpetrating a deception typically practiced by politicians—claim your opponent is arguing something that they're not then attack that argument with your own agenda. Making you seem like "the winner" and your opponent look like an idiot.

As long as nobody looks too closely at what you've said. It's possible, of course, that this is simply a very poor choice of words on Coyle's part, but he puts enough emphasis on it, that such an explanation seems weak.

Claim

The claim that Coyle should be addressing is:

"The Gunners have developed a reputation as a team that can be roughed up" (as the linked article editorial starts with), and "teams are told by their managers to go out and give them a rough time". At no point is it claimed by anybody that teams are being told to deliberately maim or injure Arsenal—merely "rough them up."
 
Now there may be fans of other teams who would gleefully point out that "it's a contact sport" and "it's real football" (whatever their claims of 'real' football are).

There is a great deal of difference however between being committed, and being overly aggressive and/or uncontrolled. There is then another step to sheer recklessness, and some players too often overstep both lines.
 
Coyle's Burnley team were frequently lauded as a team who "tries to play football."

As opposed to what is the question that springs immediately to mind.

And that question is answered by looking no further than Bolton. Coyle hasn't yet turned Bolton into a team that can play without being overly physical, a trait instilled by Sam Allardyce (and one taken up by his acolyte Phil Brown).

Coincidentally perhaps, Bolton, Blackburn, and Hull are three teams which (alongside Stoke) have reputations as physical teams—teams that enter the field of play with the intention of stopping their opponents playing football.

It's no surprise that Bolton does still play that way, and will probably continue to do so, until Coyle changes more players and has more time with them.
 
No team is whiter than white—all teams have had bad boys and players that exhibit too much aggression. Most clubs tolerate those players for as long as they also play brilliant football. Sadly some clubs actively encourage that side of their players, and deliberately train that aggression in.

Prior to the interview noted here with Coyle I had always felt he was a manager who at least tried to get his players to play football "the right way"—i.e. not simply trying to disrupt their opponents with overly aggressive play. I'm beginning to doubt that now if he does indeed, as he claims, encourage his players to be aggressive.

Colours

The opinion Coyle expresses is found all too frequently in football, with strength and aggression being mistaken for commitment. Arsenal are not the only team to be 'dealt with' in this way by teams who like to play rough.

The problem with playing rough, tough and aggressive is (aside from not being attractive to watch) that it too often results in injuries—many of them small, but sadly too many serious.
 
Lastly, the type of argument Coyle is using here colours the opinions of people who have neither time, knowledge or in many cases perhaps intelligence, to understand the lies it espouses and damage it ultimately causes.

As an example I give you this analysis: In a Google search comparison, "feel sorry for Aaron Ramsey" showed 10 results, whilst "feel sorry for Ryan Shawcross" showed 543 results.

This simple search result is an appalling indictment that something is seriously skewed when the person whose leg has been seriously broken has less sympathy than the perpetrator of that break (albeit not "meaning it").