Aguero banned for three games (updated)

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.

Completely agree, corrupt as fuck, plastic bastards, the FA and Gill.
I pray we batter them at the swamp but our odds significantly reduced without Aguero.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I still they are there for the taking, with or without Sergio. We have more than enough to turn them over and Shriek looked like he was saving himself last night hoping he plays as well on Sat afternoon; -)
 
Completely agree, corrupt as fuck, plastic bastards, the FA and Gill.
I pray we batter them at the swamp but our odds significantly reduced without Aguero
I'd say that's absurd.

He's one of the least critical players to our build-up play.

Our build-up play without him will be just as fluent (if not better) except someone else will be up top, tucking away the final ball
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say that's absurd.

He's one of the least critical players to our build-up play.

Our build-up play without him will be just as fluent (if not better) except someone else will be up top, tucking away the final ball

He's still be missed but I'm not as concerned about it as I would've been in years gone by because Pep's style of football should see us cope ok. We just need to hope that whoever is in his position to finish off the moves can do it as clinically as he normally would.
 
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.

I'm sure someone on Sky said that Aguero could be charged retrospectively because there was video footage of the incident which could then be reviewed but there wasn't any video footage of the Lamela eye gauge only still images and therefore no further action could be taken. So, once again, it's the luck of the draw whether you get charged or not.
The media, unsurprisingly seeing as they are the ones driving the Aguero situation, appear to have taken the stance that whilst it may not be strictly by the letter of the law the ends justify the means.
 
Just looking at past derby games on you-tube ,the 4-1 when Vinney ran the length of the pitch. Was hoping he would score but Sami lashed it home. At 20 mins into the game Fat Arse jumps into Vinney leading with his fist and elbow. Catches Vinney full on in the face. The ref see's it but no action taken. Vinney no theatrics. Wonder how long the FA and TV are going to take before they look into it ?
 
The biggest problem here is the complete lack of clarity from the FA on which decisions are reviewed, what the criteria is, and crucially, the timing of the report to the FA from the referee. There is ample time between the referee submitting his report for him to be influenced, by the media or by re-watching the match over and over, to mean the report itself is compromised at any given time. After this debacle, I firmly believe this happens periodically. I woudl even guess that part of how high you get in the game depends not just on your ability, but also your willingness to bend to the FA's will.

The common view has to be that this suits the FA's cloak and dagger approach, to hide some of the above, as every supporter of every premier league club will feel aggrieved by an FA decision at some point.

I am totally against re-reffing a game excessively once it is played, but i think it is about time that the FA, and PGMOL, were audited VERY independently and these processes revealed. Just this season in the games I have seen, Bardsley for Sunderland could have been off, Costa at Chelsea should have been off twice in the opening two games yet scored a winner in each - where do you draw the line?

There are too many instances of players getting off with things, usually England internationals, and others not being reviewed at all. With City it seems the vast majority of incidents are reviewed at the whim of the FA, or the media, and the FA is not afraid to go against its own rules to ensure City are punished. Then you look across the road and see the Fat Potato Head swearing after every misplaced pass or shot, in the ref's face for minutes at a time, elbows frequently not even reviewed post game, and it is inevitable that there is a feeling of injustice.

If Mariner didn't see that then he needs to step down for a while, or at least the club need to request that he does not officiate a game again for us this season, as there can be no confidence that he is able to do the job fairly. Who knows what else he won''t see during the next game? Unfortunately this does not address the real problem at all, but if Mariner is happy to take it on the chin for his bosses, then he needs to get a crack from us too.

I just hope all this talk of elbows means the ref for the derby is on the ball, with Fellaini, Rooney and Zlatan in their line up the threat of an elbow is ever-present, intentional or not, then maybe we will see a less aggressive side from them aerially. Will hold my breath on any retrospective actions following however...
 
One simple question. How do report on something you did not see or saw and deemed not serious. A second by second match report written after the event is impossible. So the question must be asked directly. Eg did you see the elbow on Reid? Is different to - was the clash with Reid serious. If he answers no to the first then it is referred. If he says no to second it is let go. The nature of the question and who asks the question is all important.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.