johnmc
Well-Known Member
Ok mate. If that's your argument. How does Kuns elbow go from being in front of Reids jaw to behind it?
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
Ok mate. If that's your argument. How does Kuns elbow go from being in front of Reids jaw to behind it?
Thebigbluehouse
Well-Known Member
I'm of the opinion that the ref did see it at the time. But decided to play on as Reid was feigning injury to get a free kick, so giving them possession. Obviously changing his tune so he doesn't look like he's made the wrong call. Today's society, easier to look the other way and deny all knowledge.
citytill1die84
Well-Known Member
Looks like Reid has landed a right hand on Kun also.
Poor photo.
johnmc
Well-Known Member
Looks like Reid has landed a right hand on Kun also.
Poor photo.
Kuns reaction after it suggests he was probably caught in the face.
Rammy Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 May 2008
- Messages
- 32,117
It's magic.Ok mate. If that's your argument. How does Kuns elbow go from being in front of Reids jaw to behind it?
Blue Mooner
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Jun 2005
- Messages
- 3,139
The only angle you can judge contact is front on from the incident.
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
I'm of the opinion that the ref did see it at the time. But decided to play on as Reid was feigning injury to get a free kick, so giving them possession. Obviously changing his tune so he doesn't look like he's made the wrong call. Today's society, easier to look the other way and deny all knowledge.
Yeah, that's quite plausible. I don't think Marriner has an agenda against our club - more a case that he doesn't want to drop himself in it by saying he saw it and decided no action at the time but the subsequent scutiny in the media means he is now claiming he didn't see it.
Whether that's the case or not I've no idea but it's just a gut feeling. Plenty of times refs have used the "didn't see it" line and I suspect they aren't always telling the truth.
Terra Passenger
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Feb 2012
- Messages
- 1,039
No contact was made. However, contact is not necessary for a finding of violent conduct.
We might be appealing on the basis of no intent or that the referee had a clear view of this on the field and that it's therefore outside the scope of retrospective review.
No contact was made. However, contact is not necessary for a finding of violent conduct.
We might be appealing on the basis of no intent or that the referee had a clear view of this on the field.
From that angle it looks like he's shrugging off his arm which was in Aguero's face.
Ok mate. If that's your argument. How does Kuns elbow go from being in front of Reids jaw to behind it?
Kun moves it there, without impediment.
Tricky Dickys Right Foot Shot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2008
- Messages
- 10,553
Kun moves it there, without impediment.
He looks at Reid first before throwing an elbow, whether or not he landed it or intended to it's still violent conduct, if you throw a punch and miss you would still be sent off or punished by the FA.
Tricky Dickys Right Foot Shot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2008
- Messages
- 10,553
Watch and he'll get no ban, play and get sent off in the first minute for a stamp ... On Rooney's face. ;-)
He's out of the derby anyway with a thigh injury.
prestonibbo_mcfc
Well-Known Member
He looks at Reid first before throwing an elbow, whether or not he landed it or intended to it's still violent conduct, if you throw a punch and miss you would still be sent off or punished by the FA.
Frank Bruno got away with it, all the time.
kaz7
Well-Known Member
Calf and he may not be that injuredHe's out of the derby anyway with a thigh injury.
Where's that from?He's out of the derby anyway with a thigh injury.
Gordyola
Well-Known Member
That doesn't prove anything unless the world is only 2D
He's out of the derby anyway with a thigh injury.
Where've you seen that? Not saying you're wrong but I've not read anything about the severity of his injury
Gordyola
Well-Known Member
Clear as day the ref saw it. To overrule him or for him to change his mind, whether right or wrong, is setting a precedent for retro refereeing of games. Another new rule made for us. Therefore that would be the argument I would make.
Also if it's a hearing I would refer to felani incidents as well as numerous bad calls we got last season including several penalties not given, penalties against that were given and unreal offsides against us. About time we got something in our favour.
Doesn't matter whether he so it or not the FA changed the rules
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/24847724
I agree entirely and have asked many times why Kun looks for his man instead of at the ball, as he did in this incident, though he doesn't normally throw his elbow.I think he meant it but in my original post was guessing what City's defence might be, that is ' didn't hit him and didn't intend to'.He looks at Reid first before throwing an elbow, whether or not he landed it or intended to it's still violent conduct, if you throw a punch and miss you would still be sent off or punished by the FA.
I don't think he hit him, I do think he meant to, though not in the face.