Aguero banned for three games (updated)

Personally think City are gambling-Kun is injured and may miss a few games, so nothing to lose. And, Mariner is a liar.
 
johnmc said:
He caught him on the jaw. Plus it's irrelevant if he did or didn't. The fact he went for Reid with his elbow is enough.

Our only reason for appeal for me is that the ref must have seen it and took no action.
Click to expand...

bang on correct,,i don't think we are contesting if he's guilty or not, it's about how the law is being applied and that's through lies, i can't see how we can prove it though or indeed how Marriner can prove he didn't see it, if this was a court case and marriner had been driving down the road and killed a pedestrian in front of his car at the same distance as Aguero he'd be bang up for undue care and attention, the judge would not buy it that he never seen the pedestrian
 
Last edited:
johnmc said:
Google search. Aguero Reid. Images. Plain to see.
Click to expand...

Not a pop John,from what I've seen there is no contact with the elbow,intent was there,IMO.....I've seen various comments from..."in the throat" "nearly smashed his cheekbone" "straight on the Vera",and now yours "on the jaw"......yet someone 5 yards away,seen nothing.
As I've said,not a pop.
 
marco said:
bang on correct,,i don't think we are contesting if he's guilty or not, it's about how the law is being applied and that's through lies, i can't see how we can prove it though or indeed how Marriner can prove he didn't see it, if this was a court case and marriner had been driving down the road and killed a pedestrian in front of his car at the same distance as Aguero he'd be bang up for manslaughter the judge would not buy it that he never saw the pedestrian
Click to expand...

Think that's undue care and attention ?
 
SPIDERBOY said:
Not a pop John,from what I've seen there is no contact with the elbow,intent was there,IMO.....I've seen various comments from..."in the throat" "nearly smashed his cheekbone" "straight on the Vera",and now yours "on the jaw"......yet someone 5 yards away,seen nothing.
As I've said,not a pop.
Click to expand...

I'm going off photographic evidence. See my link above. He did catch him. And I personally think there was intent. He should get banned. I don't want him to. But I couldn't argue if he is. I'm hoping we can prove the ref saw it. That's what our argument should be in the hearing. I'd want Marriner to tell us what he did see then seeing how he looked at it and whether all games are going to be retro reffed.
 
I will expect him to get a lot of bans in the future.

Fellaini escaped a retrospective ban for appearing to elbow Emre Can at Anfield and was not punished for a similar foul on Dejan Lovren at Old Trafford.

Fellaini smashed his forearm into the face of Manchester City's Pablo Zabaleta back in March 2014
Fellaini escaped without punishment following this elbow on Joe Allen of Wales on international duty
Fellaini connects with Ron Vlaar's neck during a Premier League match at Old Trafford in 2014
 
johnmc said:
He caught him on the jaw. Plus it's irrelevant if he did or didn't. The fact he went for Reid with his elbow is enough.

Our only reason for appeal for me is that the ref must have seen it and took no action.
Click to expand...

So we are going to call the ref a liar? Can't see that going well.
 
Whatever happens it could have been worse. Sergio's injured and may not have played anyway, we have a great squad whatever happens and we've put down a marker that we won't take any shit from these bastards for the rest of the season. Oh, and any favouritism shown to our raggy friends from now on will stick out like a sore thumb.
 
johnmc said:
I'm going off photographic evidence. See my link above. He did catch him. And I personally think there was intent. He should get banned. I don't want him to. But I couldn't argue if he is. I'm hoping we can prove the ref saw it. That's what our argument should be in the hearing. I'd want Marriner to tell us what he did see then seeing how he looked at it and whether all games are going to be retro reffed.
Click to expand...

I agreed with what you said,bar contact with the elbow.
And as I posted earlier,I genuinely think the ref has no escape route if we are using video evidence...he should also be banned,no way he can say he did not see it.
 
Champions again in 2012 said:
I am pretty sure that we are contesting the charge on the basis that Marriner had a clear and unobstructed view from no more than 6 yards away. In view of this the club will probably argue that as the referee has a clear view he cannot fully justify the "I didn't see it" argument. If the commission believes he may have seen it then there is no case to answer as they cannot re-referee the game because the officials made the wrong call. If that's the case then wether he should or should not have been sent off is irrelevant. However if they decide Marriner did not see it then I think they will ban Kun but the club would have shown the referees they are not taking this sh*t lying down anymore.
Click to expand...
His out will be the he saw it but 'didn't recognise it'. Dermot Gallagher has already tendered this option by proxy.
 
johnmc said:
But from the angle I've posted you can see the point of contact. Look at reids face. You can't do that with your face unless there is contact.
Click to expand...
To me its clear that Aguero catches him in the throat area. It looks like the ball hit him smack in the face. Intent? It depends how the law is regarding this and the burden of proof-its not a criminal case, so probably easier to prove.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top