Aguero banned for three games (updated)

[Yaya_Tony]

This is black and white to me. A potentially dodgy incident gets left by the ref at the time who was looking straight at it, a few relatively innocuous comments on sky and five live later, the papers pick it up, and suddenly our best performer for the past half decade is injured, skipping international duty and retrospectively banned from the Derby. All this against the backdrop of a ref outright stating he's been told what to say previously, and the head of the fa admitting that the scum winning brings in money from the 700 zillion plastics abroad. Something fucking stinks here. Let's do our talking on the pitch next week, with or without Sergio.

 

[hutton who blue]

This is black and white to me. A potentially dodgy incident gets left by the ref at the time who was looking straight at it, a few relatively innocuous comments on sky and five live later, the papers pick it up, and suddenly our best performer for the past half decade is injured, skipping international duty and retrospectively banned from the Derby. All this against the backdrop of a ref outright stating he's been told what to say previously, and the head of the fa admitting that the scum winning brings in money from the 700 zillion plastics abroad. Something fucking stinks here. Let's do our talking on the pitch next week, with or without Sergio.

Correct mate.

 

[Chippy_boy]

We have to add being feared to what we already have. That makes the fuckers who stitch us up think twice before doing so. It makes the cunts who bad mouth us and make up stories also take a step back for fear of the repercussions if they do. It worked for the rags for years and we have nothing to lose. If you are being bullied you can take the abuse and hide in the shadows hoping it will stop....it never does. Or you can hurt the bully so much that they move on to an easier target. Come on City fight back!

Totally agree mate.

We have taken the moral high ground and "turned the other cheek" for years. Whilst this is in principle very admirable, what we fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with normal people who will respect us for our principles. We are dealing, in the main, with scumbags who simply see it as a sign of weakness; an opportunity to do what they like, to say what they like, to print what they like, with absolutely no fear whatsoever of any repercussions. Basically our consistent lack of response in the face of severe provocation, has trained the press, the media, the official, the FA, UEFA and everyone else into thinking that when t comes to City, anything goes.

We'll enough is enough. Plainly, our strategy is not working and we must change it.

I say this through gritted teeth, but there is no denying that the most successful British manager in recent years has obviously been Ferguson. Unlike us, he jumped down the throat of anyone and anything that represented so much as a tiny obstacle in his path and the media, the officials and pretty much every on in football feared him for it. Referees were afraid of him, jounalised dared not criticise. This strategy worked. It is no coincidence that he presided over United's most successful period in the club's history. It is in large part because of the absolute power and control he and behind him, the club tried to exert over everything around them. They built up an aura of "don't dare mess with us". The very opposite of our "go ahead lads, fill yer boots" strategy.

We need to get tough and it needs to start now.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Maybe Marriner actually didn't see Kun make an elbow gesture towards Reid.

It's entirely possible that he was looking at both players but thought it was a coming together rather than a lash out. Then when viewing it on TV realise he got it wrong.

The RULES however, respect the fact that referees are human and capable of error. The RULES therefore allow referees to make mistakes and yet still have ultimate responsibility for everything that happens on the pitch that they saw.

The RULES thereore do not allow third parties to retrospectively override the referee's decisions on matters the referee saw. And critically, THE RULES do not allow the referee to change his decision afterwards.

The right thing for the referee to do is to say, "You know what lads, I am sorry I got that one wrong. Looking at it again, it was worse than I thought. In hindsight, I should have sent him off, but there's nothing i can do about it now."

No-one would have any problem with that. Football is a fast moving, complex, contact sport and mistake are inevitable. No problem.

But to say "I didn't see it", if in fact you did see it, IS CHEATING, pure and simple.

It's a very sorry state of affairs if the very people we pay to police the rules are themselves cheats.

 

[Sunny Coast Blue]

Totally agree mate.

We have taken the moral high ground and "turned the other cheek" for years. Whilst this is in principle very admirable, what we fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with normal people who will respect us for our principles. We are dealing, in the main, with scumbags who simply see it as a sign of weakness; an opportunity to do what they like, to say what they like, to print what they like, with absolutely no fear whatsoever of any repercussions. Basically our consistent lack of response in the face of severe provocation, has trained the press, the media, the official, the FA, UEFA and everyone else into thinking that when t comes to City, anything goes.

We'll enough is enough. Plainly, our strategy is not working and we must change it.

I say this through gritted teeth, but there is no denying that the most successful British manager in recent years has obviously been Ferguson. Unlike us, he jumped down the throat of anyone and anything that represented so much as a tiny obstacle in his path and the media, the officials and pretty much every on in football feared him for it. Referees were afraid of him, jounalised dared not criticise. This strategy worked. It is no coincidence that he presided over United's most successful period in the club's history. It is in large part because of the absolute power and control he and behind him, the club tried to exert over everything around them. They built up an aura of "don't dare mess with us". The very opposite of our "go ahead lads, fill yer boots" strategy.

We need to get tough and it needs to start now.

Top words, although I will say this... It's obvious even fooking Bournemouth would win ''all'' those titles with the resources the rags have had behind them & I'm not talking about the money. Under the conditions that we have had to play against they would be a mid table team, which makes our success greater than anything they have achieved.
Match fixing moves in mysterious ways, its all starting to add up, and I hope I live long enough to watch the chooks come home to roost. CUNTS & CHEATS the lot of em.

 

[Chris in London]

The RULES however, respect the fact that referees are human and capable of error. The RULES therefore allow referees to make mistakes and yet still have ultimate responsibility for everything that happens on the pitch that they saw.

The RULES thereore do not allow third parties to retrospectively override the referee's decisions on matters the referee saw. And critically, THE RULES do not allow the referee to change his decision afterwards.

The right thing for the referee to do is to say, "You know what lads, I am sorry I got that one wrong. Looking at it again, it was worse than I thought. In hindsight, I should have sent him off, but there's nothing i can do about it now."

No-one would have any problem with that. Football is a fast moving, complex, contact sport and mistake are inevitable. No problem.

But to say "I didn't see it", if in fact you did see it, IS CHEATING, pure and simple.

It's a very sorry state of affairs if the very people we pay to police the rules are themselves cheats.

What makes this worse is that the PGMOL's agenda appears to be demonstrating that their referees DONT make mistakes, or at least are not pilloried for getting it wrong. The ones where the referee "doesn't see" the incident he was looking at directly appear to be the ones that are repeated by Sky/BBC ad nauseum. That's why Aguero ends up being charged retrospectively yet Lallana doesn't.

So we have a situation where if the media chooses to shout loud enough, players get banned. That must be wrong.

 

[Danamy]

What makes this worse is that the PGMOL's agenda appears to be demonstrating that their referees DONT make mistakes, or at least are not pilloried for getting it wrong. The ones where the referee "doesn't see" the incident he was looking at directly appear to be the ones that are repeated by Sky/BBC ad nauseum. That's why Aguero ends up being charged retrospectively yet Lallana doesn't.

So we have a situation where if the media chooses to shout loud enough, players get banned. That must be wrong.

And when it comes to the Hair Bear and Costa they conveniently lose their voices?

 

[Chippy_boy]

What makes this worse is that the PGMOL's agenda appears to be demonstrating that their referees DONT make mistakes, or at least are not pilloried for getting it wrong. The ones where the referee "doesn't see" the incident he was looking at directly appear to be the ones that are repeated by Sky/BBC ad nauseum. That's why Aguero ends up being charged retrospectively yet Lallana doesn't.

So we have a situation where if the media chooses to shout loud enough, players get banned. That must be wrong.

Totally agree, and I said earlier that either the referee's decision is supreme and final, or all refereeing decisions should be subject to retrospective review, irrespective of who saw what and when. I'd prefer the former option, but I could put up with the latter. Either would do.

But as it stands, we have a situation were the rules can be deliberately abused in order to punish players / teams that those in charge wish to punish, whilst letting off those that they want to let off. It's open to flagrant abuse, as we can see.

But heck, that's probably all part of the plan isn't it. Why would those in charge who are in favour of cheating, wish to tighten up the rules so that they can't cheat. The current system suits their purposes perfectly.

 

[Blueband Brother]

Obviously not something we want going into the derby but it is what it is and there is enough of quality in the squad and Guardiola is more than capable of picking a functional and equally as effective team. So I will rather stress the fact that the squad will be different ( Iheanacho can come in and do a job (and he will be smarting after what he did for Nigeria), Nolito, even players like Gundogan can get involved and push De Bruyne to the left etc) rather than focus on the team being weaker because of Aguero's absence.

He is one of the best players in the world and we will miss his individuality (although is not necessarily always a good thing) and his ability to create something and bring moments of magic but the team has other players that can do it as well and Aguero absence may mean that there is more coordination in the build up and in the final third, something Guardiola has insinuated about Aguero a couple of times already. He will be a miss but the team will cope and he can now at least rest, go full on in the champions league and come back ready to lead to front line in the premier league.

Concerning the actual incident, you can see why he was penalized although the three match ban is a bit harsh but a sort of punishment had to be handed out. The media vultures were circling around the whole incident the whole time, as expected. Perhaps Aguero was being frustrated by Reid's persistent irritation or he was frustrated with the Argentina national team situation but this is something obviously that should not happen again.

 

[Vic]

So we have a situation where if the media chooses to shout loud enough, players get banned. That must be wrong.

Yet that's the case. Riley has said that trawling through video of every match would be too onerous so they review only those highlighted in the media. That's double trouble: the media can pick and choose how much they rerun a particular incident, and unless live also control whether to show an incident at all in edited highlights.

FIFA generally were against re-refereeing matches but the FA got a dispensation "for justice" so I suppose you could lobby FIFA to say the system allows bias and corruption - but you'd have to get it past Gill.