You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Aguero banned for three games (updated)
- Thread starter citytill1die84
- Start date
uwe rosler 28
Well-Known Member
hasn't been reviewed yet. if this was a legal case it's an abuse of process on more than one level. And the offence is not that clear cut. You look at the photos on the back pages, it looks clear cut, but you view it from different angles and it's not. I refer you to Danny Murphy on MOTD and Mark Ogden the man utd supporting journalist who thought it was a yellow card offence.
It needs a unanimous decision to get a ban. There may also be a range of sentences available?
If it hasn'tbeen reviewed then why has he been charged? Sounds to me like it has been reviewed! And a decision has been made! Wonder if city have asked for an extra 24 hours so they can get the calf scan results
Nicely summed up.Move on guys, there's no agenda. Reid and the papers made an absolute meal of it, but there was intent. I don't think it needed a ban but I'm not surprised. We'll be just fine without him, and he'll bang in a hat-trick on his return.
bluemoonmatt
Well-Known Member
worthless wum??? lol 93:20 is right though, theres not a chance. Aguero being banned benefits the rags so he will get a ban Pep or no Pep. Now put the pipe down and go to bed.It's a legitimate and honest question you worthless wum! Do they make decisions that are questionable but are good for business or do they follow the letter of the law?
Manc Born & Bred
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2005
- Messages
- 11,715
At worst it was a yellow and it barely warrants that. What the media should be picking up on is Reid's reaction and now a supposed too class Rev who couldn't see an incident from a few yards away with no obstruction
ADegenerate
Well-Known Member
worthless wum??? lol 93:20 is right though, theres not a chance. Aguero being banned benefits the rags so he will get a ban Pep or no Pep. Now put the pipe down and go to bed.
It's in jest mate. There I got an answer. That's all I needed. I guess I should have called him a **** but that's boring.
bluemoonmatt
Well-Known Member
Would have been more accurate !It's in jest mate. There I got an answer. That's all I needed. I guess I should have called him a **** but that's boring.
IM NOT REALLY HERE
Well-Known Member
It's in jest mate. There I got an answer. That's all I needed. I guess I should have called him a **** but that's boring.
Busy **** isn't boring
City Raider
Well-Known Member
At least if he appeals we'll know the injury isn't bad.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
blueju
Well-Known Member
Get over it he lashed out and was lucky not to make contact. You can't swing your elbow out like that. We can still beat those red cunts without him, it just opens the door for someone else to shine.
Gray
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 May 2004
- Messages
- 28,815
- Team supported
- ABU & The Bus Wreckers
He was in the wrong and he knows it.
But will the powers that be exhibit consistency - will they f..k!
But will the powers that be exhibit consistency - will they f..k!
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Get over it he lashed out and was lucky not to make contact. You can't swing your elbow out like that. We can still beat those red cunts without him, it just opens the door for someone else to shine.
Unfortunately, yes. It only then comes down to whether it's enough for a violent conduct charge. Just because it's not consistently applied doesn't make this charge wrong.
With luck, he'll get over his calf issue, avoid being kicked around by Smalling while Clattenburg checks his hair, and is back for BMG in the CL.
Father Paul
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 5,253
I don't know why so many people seem to think 'we will be fine without him' objectively it is likely to reduce our chances of winning the game. Hopefully we can adjust and still get a result but missing Kun for the biggest match of the first few months of the season does little to help our causeNicely summed up.
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
You know the head of the premier league thinks a successful rag team is the best thing for business?It's a legitimate and honest question you worthless wum! Do they make decisions that are questionable but are good for business or do they follow the letter of the law?
Decepticon
Well-Known Member
I don't know why so many people seem to think 'we will be fine without him' objectively it is likely to reduce our chances of winning the game. Hopefully we can adjust and still get a result but missing Kun for the biggest match of the first few months of the season does little to help our cause
He's very consistent in the derby, of course it's advantage for them. The media saw the opportunity and went for the kill.
CitizenTID
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 5,053
Reid didn't make a meal of it he got caught by Sergio's hand on the follow through in his adams apple which if you've ever been hit there will know it hurts like fuck!Move on guys, there's no agenda. Reid and the papers made an absolute meal of it, but there was intent. I don't think it needed a ban but I'm not surprised. We'll be just fine without him, and he'll bang in a hat-trick on his return.
I don't know why so many people seem to think 'we will be fine without him' objectively it is likely to reduce our chances of winning the game. Hopefully we can adjust and still get a result but missing Kun for the biggest match of the first few months of the season does little to help our cause
Yeah the same people claiming it's fine we will still win, give others a chance etc will be the same people buzzing their tits off if he gets let off. I agree that we are in a better place to cope without him but his movement will be missed massively against them twats
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
It's interesting because I've seen a few American fans who don't really seem to understand this. There are two issues here.It's a legitimate and honest question you worthless wum! Do they make decisions that are questionable but are good for business or do they follow the letter of the law?
The first is that the process for instituting a retrospective review is opaque. One person can elbow someone, it's not seen by the ref but there's no further action taken (generally because there is no media witch-hunt). Yet another can do it, the media is all over it and the consequence is a retrospective violent conduct charge. If clubs could request a review and that was the only way to initiate the process then we'd all know where we stand.
The second issue is that once the process has commenced there is little or no leeway. The 3-man panel has unanimously (and supposedly independently of one another) agreed that a red card would have been the correct outcome. For violent conduct that's almost certainly a 3-match ban.
"Good for business" doesn't come into it. In fact it's usually what benefits the rags or England. So Rooney, wearing an England shirt, deliberately kicks an opponent and is rightly sent off. He gets a 3-game ban but the FA appeal and it's reduced to 2.
The PL head, Richard Scudamore, has even openly admitted that the rags being out if the top four is bad for business.
ADegenerate
Well-Known Member
You know the head of the premier league thinks a successful rag team is the best thing for business?
Not exactly. I mean I sort of did but I thought it was about ratings and ratings would trump that. Taking Kun out of the game taints the result. I don't know anything about the FA I was just curious if the magnitude of the game affects decisions.
Reid didn't make a meal of it he got caught by Sergio's hand on the follow through in his adams apple which if you've ever been hit there will know it hurts like fuck!
His Adam's apple must be in his forehead.