Aguero banned for three games (updated)

Make our case, let the FA know that we think the referee is chatting shite and we aren't willing to accept trial by Sky fucking sports and then we can move on.
He'll still likely get a ban and then we can go to the shower of cunts own back yard and beat them without him.
I look forward to Marriners next game at the Etihad though something tells me I shouldn't be holding my breath. If nothing else comes of this hearing I hope it's us as a club showing we won't accept anymore atrocious refereeing, it's been going on too long.
 
If Marriner is saying he did not see it,then he also deserves a ban......conclusive evidence he was looking straight at it.
 
Marvin said:
It's not an appeal. It's a hearing. They haven't decided if he's guilty. All they have done is give us notice that they are going to review the incident and we have opportunity to put forward a case. That's my understanding anyway.
Click to expand...

We may want to ensure the incident is not only seen from the media evidence, where the angle viewed looks like Sergio elbowed him, but from the angle shown on amateur video where it appears Sergio did not make contact. Our case may be that Sergio did not hit him or intend to hit him.

I would like to think they would ask the reason Reid went down clutching his face, other than to con the ref who he did not realise was blind.
 
fredmont said:
We may want to ensure the incident is not only seen from the media evidence, where the angle viewed looks like Sergio elbowed him, but from the angle shown on amateur video where it appears Sergio did not make contact. Our case may be that Sergio did not hit him or intend to hit him.

I would like to think they would ask the reason Reid went down clutching his face, other than to con the ref who he did not realise was blind.
Click to expand...

He caught him on the jaw. Plus it's irrelevant if he did or didn't. The fact he went for Reid with his elbow is enough.

Our only reason for appeal for me is that the ref must have seen it and took no action.
 
I am pretty sure that we are contesting the charge on the basis that Marriner had a clear and unobstructed view from no more than 6 yards away. In view of this the club will probably argue that as the referee has a clear view he cannot fully justify the "I didn't see it" argument. If the commission believes he may have seen it then there is no case to answer as they cannot re-referee the game because the officials made the wrong call. If that's the case then wether he should or should not have been sent off is irrelevant. However if they decide Marriner did not see it then I think they will ban Kun but the club would have shown the referees they are not taking this sh*t lying down anymore.
 
Eli Panic said:
As a former referee, I would be watching the players in this scenario, already knowing where the ball is going to be a split second later. The ball is in my peripheral vision and it isn't about to do anything out of character. This is exactly what Marriner does.

The other point about proving he was watching the players is less strong in my view, because he could easily say Sergio's arm was restricted from his view, or another lame excuse. But I still think the charge should not have been made in the first place, and I think we will win.

On the other hand, if Sergio had been sent off at the time, there would have been no complaints from most of us.
Click to expand...

speak for yourself I would have been absolutely raging
 
johnmc said:
He caught him on the jaw. Plus it's irrelevant if he did or didn't. The fact he went for Reid with his elbow is enough.

Our only reason for appeal for me is that the ref must have seen it and took no action.
Click to expand...

Agree with all that,apart from,"he caught him on the jaw".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top