Adebayor's ban

[vincent]

Off goal.com message board. Made me facepalm

yes city beat us and yes city were the better team on the day but adebayor other then ur goal wat else did u do... evrytime u touched the ball gallas or vermallen was there to take it back. u got dis posseded on a regualr basis, if u didnt score that goal then u would have been the worst player on the field. and lets not get started on u just trying to hurt other players, realy shows a lack of professionalism and ihope u get a suspension, p.s... dont say things ur actions cant cash... ur shite

Not only are the articles crap but there are so many idiots who visit there, (myself included of course) must be the pretty pictures and the easy layout.

Goal.com = Nigeria's finest. Clueless some of the people on that site.

 

[Pam]

We should be kicking up as much stink as we can before the FA decide anything and make it not worth their while. They might get reluctant to treating City differently to other clubs, in case any double standard half-wittery were to blow up in their weasel twat faces.

 

[aaronsteedman]

I'll be honest with you, havent read the whole thrad yet, so sorry if this has been mentioned. But look at his hands after he connects with RVP. Its as if he's like, oh shit. sorry. If he had really meant it he would walk away without any reaction, probably with a grin on his face.

 

[Dubai Blue]

I'll be honest with you, havent read the whole thrad yet, so sorry if this has been mentioned. But look at his hands after he connects with RVP. Its as if he's like, oh shit. sorry. If he had really meant it he would walk away without any reaction, probably with a grin on his face.

The gif cuts out before he does anything with his hands. What are you seeing?

 

[dannybcity]

Barton says sorry for Etuhu lungeLast updated at 10:09 13 November 2007

Newcastle midfielder Joey Barton insists there was "no malice" in his challenge on Dickson Etuhu during Saturday's derby draw against Sunderland.
The Football Association last night confirmed Barton will not be punished after referee Martin Atkinson decided to take no action over the studs-high tackle.

"There was no malice in it, nor was it premeditated," Barton told Sky Sports News. "If I caused him any injury, then I apologise. Things happen in the heat of a derby game.
"It was my third game back and I'm still a bit rusty. If I was fully match fit the situation would have been avoided."
Atkinson did not get a full view of the challenge, so Barton has escaped action.
An FA spokesman said: "The Football Association can only take action in the case of incidents that are not seen by officials.
"Whilst it is clear that the officials did not see the full extent of the incident, they did see players coming together and to take any further action would be tantamount to re-refereeing the game and this would be contrary to the laws of the game."
No blame has been attached to Atkinson for his failure to take action against Barton during the match as he was unable to see the incident clearly from his position.
His assistant also saw the coming together and according to an FA source, "no-one is suggesting any of them could or should have seen what you might call the misconduct part of the incident".

Under FIFA guidelines, a retrospective charge for violent conduct can only be laid down in instances where the match official does not notice the incident at all.
The Association's 'fast-track' disciplinary system is designed to act as an aid to officials for incidents completely out of sight of the referee or his assistants, such as off-the-ball clashes, and replicates action which would have been imposed had the referee or his assistants seen the incident.
A similar example to this case occurred last season when Jermain Defoe was alleged to have bitten Javier Mascherano.
No proceedings were initiated retrospectively by the FA because while the referee saw the two players clash, he did not see any actual violent conduct from his position on the pitch.


Read more: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-493332/Barton-says-sorry-Etuhu-lunge.html#ixzz0R0iKwnDS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... z0R0iKwnDS</a>

Case closed, until the FA desides to change the rules.

 

[Freestyler]

Barton says sorry for Etuhu lungeLast updated at 10:09 13 November 2007

Newcastle midfielder Joey Barton insists there was "no malice" in his challenge on Dickson Etuhu during Saturday's derby draw against Sunderland.
The Football Association last night confirmed Barton will not be punished after referee Martin Atkinson decided to take no action over the studs-high tackle.

"There was no malice in it, nor was it premeditated," Barton told Sky Sports News. "If I caused him any injury, then I apologise. Things happen in the heat of a derby game.
"It was my third game back and I'm still a bit rusty. If I was fully match fit the situation would have been avoided."
Atkinson did not get a full view of the challenge, so Barton has escaped action.
An FA spokesman said: "The Football Association can only take action in the case of incidents that are not seen by officials.
"Whilst it is clear that the officials did not see the full extent of the incident, they did see players coming together and to take any further action would be tantamount to re-refereeing the game and this would be contrary to the laws of the game."
No blame has been attached to Atkinson for his failure to take action against Barton during the match as he was unable to see the incident clearly from his position.
His assistant also saw the coming together and according to an FA source, "no-one is suggesting any of them could or should have seen what you might call the misconduct part of the incident".

Under FIFA guidelines, a retrospective charge for violent conduct can only be laid down in instances where the match official does not notice the incident at all.
The Association's 'fast-track' disciplinary system is designed to act as an aid to officials for incidents completely out of sight of the referee or his assistants, such as off-the-ball clashes, and replicates action which would have been imposed had the referee or his assistants seen the incident.
A similar example to this case occurred last season when Jermain Defoe was alleged to have bitten Javier Mascherano.
No proceedings were initiated retrospectively by the FA because while the referee saw the two players clash, he did not see any actual violent conduct from his position on the pitch.


Read more: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-493332/Barton-says-sorry-Etuhu-lunge.html#ixzz0R0iKwnDS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... z0R0iKwnDS</a>

until the FA desides to change the rules.

well we know changing the rules is only right to do to a team outside the big 4.

 

[marco]

but they did change the rules,this was done before this season started,what poll said on sky will happen they will ask clattenburg if he saw the incident then ask him again to look at it on video,''wham bam 5 game ban''

 

[aaronsteedman]

I'll be honest with you, havent read the whole thrad yet, so sorry if this has been mentioned. But look at his hands after he connects with RVP. Its as if he's like, oh shit. sorry. If he had really meant it he would walk away without any reaction, probably with a grin on his face.

The gif cuts out before he does anything with his hands. What are you seeing?

Just the way he brings them towards his face, comes accross to me as if hes trying to apologise to RVP with his hands. Its hard to explain what I mean, but if you watch his right hand he brings it towards his face, kinda in a state of shock.

 

[mancityscot]

hate to say this, but the way to tell that adebayor did mean to stamp is the slight change in speed of the downward movement of his right leg, there was defo intent

 

[dannybcity]

but they did change the rules,this was done before this season started,what poll said on sky will happen they will ask clattenburg if he saw the incident then ask him again to look at it on video,''wham bam 5 game ban''

Well in that case Clattenburg can't deny that he saw it (he was literally two yards away) so there should be no need for a video. I know it won't happen that way because it's us, but it's the way it should happen.