Aguero banned for three games (updated)

Blue Mooner said:
If you are looking at an incident (As Mariner was) and you see an elbow, you would blow up for a free-kick and send the player off. Mariner was looking at the incident and didn't see anything wrong with the respective challenges. Under FA rules that should be the end of the matter.

It's like saying the ref was looking at a challenge in the penalty box that 90% of people thought was a penalty but the referee doesn't give it. Do you retrospectively award a penalty because the ref was looking at the incident but didn't 'see' the foul. No, because that was his decision based on what he saw and how he interpreted that situation - its the referees judgement, that's what they get paid to do.

This trumped up charge would never had been brought but for the rag infested media. The problem, is that the SKY pundits are so poor and ill informed about the laws governing the game that they thought they had 'caught' our star striker bang to rights. The problem is, under FA rules they haven't because the referee saw the incident and awarded nothing - if you are looking at an incident you can't claim you didn't see it.
Click to expand...

You can, often legitimately, claim you didn't see it in its entirety, every detail. Which is what Clattenberg will claim. And it will be impossible for City to prove otherwise
 
Just listening to BBC Five Live Daily from midweek and they've already convicted him.
The following are direct quotes:

1. 'What he did deserves a 3 match ban'
2. 'They can't possibly be contesting the fact that Sergio Aguero elbowed the player in the throat, the player couldn't even talk afterwards'
3. 'He's elbowed him in the throat'
4. 'Did one individual have a sneaky look at an opponent and then push his arm/elbow towards him and make some contact? Yes he did'

Apparently the fact that Andre Marriner saw it but claimed he didn't is 'a ridiculous loophole' and he should be allowed to do one thing during the game and then change it once he's seen it again later.

However, they're all idiots because they argue that City have no other options without Aguero, even claiming that Gabriel Jesus 'has come in'...
 
cibaman said:
You can, often legitimately, claim you didn't see it in its entirety, every detail. Which is what Clattenberg will claim. And it will be impossible for City to prove otherwise
Click to expand...
Marriner. Marriner. Marriner. Not Clattenburg.

I know his is the first name that pops into your head when we talk about bent refs but he wasn't the ref this time.
 
SexAndManCity said:
Just listening to BBC Five Live Daily from midweek and they've already convicted him.
The following are direct quotes:

1. 'What he did deserves a 3 match ban'
2. 'They can't possibly be contesting the fact that Sergio Aguero elbowed the player in the throat, the player couldn't even talk afterwards'
3. 'He's elbowed him in the throat'
4. 'Did one individual have a sneaky look at an opponent and then push his arm/elbow towards him and make some contact? Yes he did'

Apparently the fact that Andre Marriner saw it but claimed he didn't is 'a ridiculous loophole' and he should be allowed to do one thing during the game and then change it once he's seen it again later.

However, they're all idiots because they argue that City have no other options without Aguero, even claiming that Gabriel Jesus 'has come in'...
Click to expand...
It might be ridiculous but it isn't really a loophole. He saw the incident as he would any other and deemed there to be nothing in the challenge. If anything he should have given us a free kick for Reid pushing Sergio.
 
Once and for all, we are not appealing, we are contesting the charge. If you don't understand that then there is no hope for you
 
We should be contesting this on at least two grounds. The first is the legitimacy of bringing the charge when judged against the FA's own procedures.

Was it off the ball? No.
Was Marriner's view or that of the other officials obstructed? No.
Was the incident secondary to the challenge for the ball? No.

Therefore the charge has no basis.

The second challenge should be that, even if they don't accept the above, was a theoretical red card the right outcome of their review?

For that I'd show the very similar Fernandinho incident with Costa and the Fellaini elbow on Zabaleta. Both were punished by yellow cards rather than reds.
 
SexAndManCity said:
Just listening to BBC Five Live Daily from midweek and they've already convicted him.
The following are direct quotes:

1. 'What he did deserves a 3 match ban'
2. 'They can't possibly be contesting the fact that Sergio Aguero elbowed the player in the throat, the player couldn't even talk afterwards'
3. 'He's elbowed him in the throat'
4. 'Did one individual have a sneaky look at an opponent and then push his arm/elbow towards him and make some contact? Yes he did'

Apparently the fact that Andre Marriner saw it but claimed he didn't is 'a ridiculous loophole' and he should be allowed to do one thing during the game and then change it once he's seen it again later.

However, they're all idiots because they argue that City have no other options without Aguero, even claiming that Gabriel Jesus 'has come in'...
Click to expand...
2.He was talking to the physio on the way off the pitch so he could talk,he didn't come off injured Bilic said it was a planned sub
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
We should be contesting this on at least two grounds. The first is the legitimacy of bringing the charge when judged against the FA's own procedures.

Was it off the ball? No.
Was Marriner's view or that of the other officials obstructed? No.
Was the incident secondary to the challenge for the ball? No.

Therefore the charge has no basis.

The second challenge should be that, even if they don't accept the above, was a theoretical red card the right outcome of their review?

For that I'd show the very similar Fernandinho incident with Costa and the Fellaini elbow on Zabaleta. Both were punished by yellow cards rather than reds.
Click to expand...
How about chucking in Shrek's elbow at Wigan which was dealt with a friendly chat and cuddle from Twatenberg
 
How many times have instances like this gone to the FA panel which haven't been live on TV ?

Only seems to be games where sky's after match analysis gets stuck into it and start replaying it on SSN, by which time the other media outlets start reporting and jumping on the band wagon.
 
SexAndManCity said:
Just listening to BBC Five Live Daily from midweek and they've already convicted him.
The following are direct quotes:

1. 'What he did deserves a 3 match ban'
2. 'They can't possibly be contesting the fact that Sergio Aguero elbowed the player in the throat, the player couldn't even talk afterwards'
3. 'He's elbowed him in the throat'
4. 'Did one individual have a sneaky look at an opponent and then push his arm/elbow towards him and make some contact? Yes he did'

Apparently the fact that Andre Marriner saw it but claimed he didn't is 'a ridiculous loophole' and he should be allowed to do one thing during the game and then change it once he's seen it again later.

However, they're all idiots because they argue that City have no other options without Aguero, even claiming that Gabriel Jesus 'has come in'...
Click to expand...

Do you really disagree with them?


Sergio looked at the defender, swung an elbow at him, missed with the elbow and hit him in the throat with his forearm. We can all see that clearly on the footage.

He should have been sent off, or if the referee hadn't seen it - gotten a 3 match ban.

I don't see how anyone can argue with that and if it were any other team's player everyone on here would agree.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't contest the charge and I hope we win, but of course they've said he's guilty because he did it.
 
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