Aguero banned for three games (updated)

[aguero93:20]

Don't forget Engerland fella.

Nah they're not a threat ;)

 

[yeah whatever !!]

Nah they're not a threat ;)

They're more of a threat than the Trafford twatzoids. :)

 

[St.Pauli support]

The only defence should be the video evidence of the ref looking straight at the incident and ask the question "Unless your referee is blind how did he not see the so called incident? "

My impression is the ref just kept his eyes on the ball and the 'incident' happened within a blink.
That alone is poor refereeing. He was unbalanced anyway.

If the ref was good he had booked Sergio. End of. There is a bit too much of a drama about this.

Those available videos don't even clearly show where Reid might have been hit. Wouldn't have a chance in Germany although refs are more strict.
Videos not good enough as a clear proof shouldn't lead to a ban of a player.

 

[Sir peace frog]

My impression is the ref just kept his eyes on the ball and the 'incident' happened within a blink.
That alone is poor refereeing. He was unbalanced anyway.

If the ref was good he had booked Sergio. End of. There is a bit too much of a drama about this.

Those available videos don't even clearly show where Reid might have been hit. Wouldn't have a chance in Germany although refs are more strict.
Videos not good enough as a clear proof shouldn't lead to a ban of a player.

He'll get 3 matches he's been charged they have spoken to the ref who has said he would of given a red if he had seen it Sergio can point at his good record maybe get 2

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

It could well be. That's the point. This issue highlights bias and how the retrospective disciplinary process is subject to the whim of the media and we all know what drives that.

The comments that Aguero deserves what he gets is a very unbalanced, narrow focus that ignores context and wider issues.

What context and wider issues are you talking about?

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

My impression is the ref just kept his eyes on the ball and the 'incident' happened within a blink.
That alone is poor refereeing. He was unbalanced anyway.

If the ref was good he had booked Sergio. End of. There is a bit too much of a drama about this.

Those available videos don't even clearly show where Reid might have been hit. Wouldn't have a chance in Germany although refs are more strict.
Videos not good enough as a clear proof shouldn't lead to a ban of a player.

Is this not the arrangement the Swamp Donkeys have with PiGMoL? Get a booking and then everything's ok. Unless yer Adebayor and then there's the time-wasting with menaces which Crapps forget to put in his report!

Sergio elbowed the guy. Red Card or lack of and then the consequential FArce charge. But I have just looked at the highlights with that Beats stuff and every time a City player goes past a Wiiiiiist Hiiiiiiim player there is a forlorn attempt to grab an arm or a shoulder. I can understand the frustration of getting roughed up and swinging out. Rooney spent much of his early career at The Swamp doing very similar stuff. I can't remember the number of times the FArce charged him but Ferguson must have been furious!

 

[Bozzie]

The point is the referee clearly saw the incident and deemed no action should be taken, that should be the end of it. If the ref got it wrong then he needs educating perhaps improving his decision making. If we are to now analyse the decision even where it is clear the officials saw the incident then we may as well introduce replays during the game.

I fully understand retrospective action if the officials did not see the incident.

I'm assuming that the first question the referee is asked is "Did you see the incident?" and, that Marriner has answered "No"

So why has he lied? Has he been 'advised' by the FA as to whether he saw it or not, or is it just accepted that admitting to being unable to see further than 5 yards is preferable to admitting that you saw it but, at the time, didn't think it warranted any action but, in hindsight, think it should have. It's clear that the rule on retrospective action is, at best, badly written, personally I'd bin it completely, but at this moment it is how it is and I think the club are well within their rights to question Marriners claim.

 

[sir baconface]

The only defence should be the video evidence of the ref looking straight at the incident and ask the question "Unless your referee is blind how did he not see the so called incident? "

Depends on what the law says. Are seeing the incident and spotting the offence one and the same?

 

[St.Pauli support]

He'll get 3 matches he's been charged they have spoken to the ref who has said he would of given a red if he had seen it Sergio can point at his good record maybe get 2

Yeah maybe.
For a start the ref should try to see things during the match instead of watching TV afterwards and say what he 'would have done if'.... Goodness.
Incorrect procedure this.

Some comment from Sergio on that situation available?

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

I never get this we await the refs report like with the Feillani attempt of murder on Zabaleta

in the 67th minute I watched Fellaini stab Zabaleta 14 times with a bread knife I considered this necessary force as Zabaleta was obviously shielding the ball with an aggressive demeanor on his face

or

Despite me looking directly at the clash between Aguero and Reid I literally am a fucking ****