Aguero banned for three games (updated)

[tonea2003]

He has seen it and that's the point.
What is the point of having someone in charge of a game who hasn't got the bottle to make a decision?
He should of yellow carded him at least and it was done.

The one simple question City may be asking is "using the same footage to find Aguero guilty,please explain how the ref has not seen it and we will accept the ban".

that last line is exactly the point we should be making

 

[BucksBlue]

He'll get a ban

The City hater Custis and the Sun will be pleased then.

 

[andy h]

If this was ibrahimovic involved in exactly the same circumstances I'm sure 99% of this board would be demanding a 3 match ban. I can't see him getting off as it would completely undermine the referee. Apart from the United game we won't miss him too much, so it could be worse.

How is that possible - the referee says he did not see the incident!

 

[SPIDERBOY]

If this was ibrahimovic involved in exactly the same circumstances I'm sure 99% of this board would be demanding a 3 match ban. I can't see him getting off as it would completely undermine the referee. Apart from the United game we won't miss him too much, so it could be worse.

Personally I'm not saying he shouldn't get a ban,more hoping not.
The point I'm on about is the ref should of dealt with it during the game,and then there is no arguement.
He's not had the bottle to deal with it and has blatantly lied by saying he did not see it.
There is not a chance on this earth he did not see it.
If the FA take marriners word that he dint see it,then they are openly saying they will allow refs to lie.
Charge Aguero by all means,but the ref should be also dealt with......The lying ****.

 

[ancoats]

now he will end up with a 4 match ban after the appeal

the hate for the media is on show with this and its all down to them at SKYSPORTS /BBC and they say we are just bitter
its like having a stepson and a son of your own and treating them different you end up saying the stepson is evil. well they say the football is a family so we must be the evil stepson

 

[CTID1988]

Has anyone ever appealed and won?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

How is that possible - the referee says he did not see the incident!

You need to add on 'completely' to that last part. That was an amendment a few years back, allowing the ref to say I saw it from my angle but not everything.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

How is that possible - the referee says he did not see the incident!

That would fit in with about 75 mins of the game - Marriner saw nowt!

 

[MillionMilesAway]

now he will end up with a 4 match ban after the appeal

He won't. That's not how this works. You're always allowed to have a hearing against post-match charges.

 

[bellsouth]

Is there any chance if banned, it can be less than 3 matches or is that the minimum?

 

[Blue Til Death]

I think both players went in with arms and elbows but Reid came off worse, Sergio will get banned for certain, probably just for the rags game, however if he was playing in any other team I suspect he would walk scott free..!

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Is there any chance if banned, it can be less than 3 matches or is that the minimum?

The charge is violent conduct, and that carries 3 matches.

There may be occasional incidents with less given, but they are very occasional.

 

[moomba]

Matic was the only one I can recall where a ban dropped from three to 1. And that was after a pretty sustained media campaign.

Very few have been overturned, and I'd be amazed if this is one of them.

 

[SWP's back]

now he will end up with a 4 match ban after the appeal

How do you work that out?

 

[Plain Speaking]

If you are trying to remove someone from your back, it is a natural movement to move your upper arm quickly like Aguero did to " shrug them off".

It is difficult to prove what the referee did or didn't see. His head may be pointing towards the incident but his eyes could be looking to the side?

Additionally the same incident can look completely different from different viewpoints. The media keep showing a viewpoint that seems to show contact with Aguero 's elbow to Reid's jaw but viewed from another angle it is clear no contact was made with his elbow. It annoys me the media keep talking how Aguero contacted Reid with his elbow when it is not true.

Having said this I do expect Aguero to receive a ban, he has been trialled by the media and found guilty.

 

[Jazzman]

If this was ibrahimovic involved in exactly the same circumstances I'm sure 99% of this board would be demanding a 3 match ban. I can't see him getting off as it would completely undermine the referee. Apart from the United game we won't miss him too much, so it could be worse.

I think the ref undermined himself by lying about not seeing the incident, when it is obvious to the whole world that he was looking directly at it from a short distance.

 

[Blue Mooner]

If you are trying to remove someone from your back, it is a natural movement to move your upper arm quickly like Aguero did to " shrug them off".

It is difficult to prove what the referee did or didn't see. His head may be pointing towards the incident but his eyes could be looking to the side?

Additionally the same incident can look completely different from different viewpoints. The media keep showing a viewpoint that seems to show contact with Aguero 's elbow to Reid's jaw but viewed from another angle it is clear no contact was made with his elbow. It annoys me the media keep talking how Aguero contacted Reid with his elbow when it is not true.

Having said this I do expect Aguero to receive a ban, he has been trialled by the media and found guilty.

If viewed from the side (where Sky seem to keep showing) of course it is going to 'look! Like contact was made. The reality is there was little if any contact made. If you really 'want' to throw your elbow into someone there will not be any room for doubt. For that see Fellaini and Rooney examples.

 

[bellsouth]

The

I think the ref undermined himself by lying about not seeing the incident, when it is obvious to the whole world that he was looking directly at it from a short distance.

The refs kind of covered though isn't he? He can say that he saw the two jostling for the ball (something that cannot be denied as he's looking straight at it) but say he didn't see an elbow throw. FA (thanks to the kind people who 'sent' them the footage) can say back to him, that's fine Andre, we have another angle where he's throwing an elbow so don't worry about it.

 

[Jazzman]

The refs kind of covered though isn't he? He can say that he saw the two jostling for the ball (something that cannot be denied as he's looking straight at it) but say he didn't see an elbow throw. FA (thanks to the kind people who 'sent' them the footage) can say back to him, that's fine Andre, we have another angle where he's throwing an elbow so don't worry about it.

I am sure that's how it will be played. My statement was in response to somebody saying we would undermine the ref by challenging. I think Marriner is either a lying cnut or an incompetent cnut, so we do not have to worry about undermining him.

 

[ancoats]

He won't. That's not how this works. You're always allowed to have a hearing against post-match charges.

they can if they see the club is using the appeal to there advantage by having the advantage in playing him