We often gang up on Tom but in this thread it is a lot of Blues who seem to think he had a good game. He didn't, even if we remove the contentious penalty decision he didn't have a good game. He had nothing to do such is the way we play, for instance in the 44 pass move that led to the goal, at no time did he have to make a good or bad decision. As we refused to let the Rags near the ball they could not chalenge us never mind foul us hence me saying he had nothing to do. We did not allow him to be corrupt but that does not make him a good referee in this match or any other.
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.
Anthony Taylor (of Altrincham)
- Thread starter wolfie1988
- Start date
We often gang up on Tom but in this thread it is a lot of Blues who seem to think he had a good game. He didn't, even if we remove the contentious penalty decision he didn't have a good game. He had nothing to do such is the way we play, for instance in the 44 pass move that led to the goal, at no time did he have to make a good or bad decision. As we refused to let the Rags near the ball they could not chalenge us never mind foul us hence me saying he had nothing to do. We did not allow him to be corrupt but that does not make him a good referee in this match or any other.
We often gang up on Tom but in this thread it is a lot of Blues who seem to think he had a good game. He didn't, even if we remove the contentious penalty decision he didn't have a good game. He had nothing to do such is the way we play, for instance in the 44 pass move that led to the goal, at no time did he have to make a good or bad decision. As we refused to let the Rags near the ball they could not chalenge us never mind foul us hence me saying he had nothing to do. We did not allow him to be corrupt but that does not make him a good referee in this match or any other.
But everyone said he would stop the game and give niggly fouls and 100% book Fernandinho? He done none of that, he reffed it pretty well. Maybe our standards are low for referees these days and saying he had a good game some people might dismiss. Considering the uproar with his appointment he was a million times better than the ref last year. Had that not have been Taylor reffing there wouldn't be a thread saying the ref was poor anyway.
But everyone said he would stop the game and give niggly fouls and 100% book Fernandinho? He done none of that, he reffed it pretty well. Maybe our standards are low for referees these days and saying he had a good game some people might dismiss. Considering the uproar with his appointment he was a million times better than the ref last year. Had that not have been Taylor reffing there wouldn't be a thread saying the ref was poor anyway.
Tom, watch the 44 passes, how could he possibly break that up? The first time the Rags touched the ball after we kicked off was for their keeper to take a goal kick. From kick off to the first goal they touched it, was it 12 times and only achieved 5 passes that went to their players ?
Yes before the match the majority, me included, thought he would break the game up with niggling free kicks and book ours for nothing offences. That was BEFORE I saw our team refuse to let the Rags near them and that is my point. He didn't have a good game as many try and say, City made him redundant. You cannot wrongly award the Rags a free kick if they don't have the ball. You cannot book Ferny in the first 5 minutes if he doesn't need to tackle a Rag. You cannot award them a dubious penalty if the Rags don't even step inside the box WITH THE BALL.
kaz7
Well-Known Member
LolNo one will argue with you on that though and I certainly wouldn't stick up for him in them games. Fact is we ALL feared the worst and thankfully nothing happened.
I think how biased you are proves you cant be impartial and makes replying pointless really. I will anyway, so you are calling it a forearm smash then yeah? That isn't ott in the slightest is it, he blocked him off and was a foul debatable if it was even in the area but to describe it as that suggests you was sat waiting for something to moan about Taylor. He got that wrong yeah but fuck me the amount of refereeing and not just him I will take one decision missed over countless we sometimes see in games. You have lost it and you cannot comment on sundays performance in isolation, instead you keep referring to games where he was shocking with us. What the fuck has that got to do with Sunday, are you completely stupid? The fact the worst and most biased person on this forum likes your posts suggests how much shite you are talking.
I don't want Taylor reffing us, he shouldn't be involved in a derby and in the past he has stitched us up. Sunday he didn't and as a game he let it play and flow pretty well. Could of booked players early and didn't (despite the whole agenda police saying he will) go for a lie down and chill out, you are actually embarrassing yourself.
Churchlawtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 14,853
Jeeze, people need to move on from this for the good of their health. At least wait until the next time the arse refs one of our games! Lol
Jeeze, people need to move on from this for the good of their health. At least wait until the next time the arse refs one of our games! Lol
I never could copy and paste like the clever Johnys in here but I suppose you are right, your reply brought to mind that tv show from years gone by.....
Why don't you just switch off your television set and go out and do something less boring instead !!! swap tv for tinternet.............. yep time to move on.
(I could not post the youtube clip of it !)
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader
Well-Known Member
No one will argue with you on that though and I certainly wouldn't stick up for him in them games. Fact is we ALL feared the worst and thankfully nothing happened.
I think how biased you are proves you cant be impartial and makes replying pointless really. I will anyway, so you are calling it a forearm smash then yeah? That isn't ott in the slightest is it, he blocked him off and was a foul debatable if it was even in the area but to describe it as that suggests you was sat waiting for something to moan about Taylor. He got that wrong yeah but fuck me the amount of refereeing and not just him I will take one decision missed over countless we sometimes see in games. You have lost it and you cannot comment on sundays performance in isolation, instead you keep referring to games where he was shocking with us. What the fuck has that got to do with Sunday, are you completely stupid? The fact the worst and most biased person on this forum likes your posts suggests how much shite you are talking.
I don't want Taylor reffing us, he shouldn't be involved in a derby and in the past he has stitched us up. Sunday he didn't and as a game he let it play and flow pretty well. Could of booked players early and didn't (despite the whole agenda police saying he will) go for a lie down and chill out, you are actually embarrassing yourself.
I think most City fans came into the game on Sunday KNOWING we had a ref with doubtful antecedents and dubious connections. My impartiality is tinged by my bias. I am biased towards all things sky blue, but there was nothing I, nor anyone connected with MCFC, could do with the appointment. We had to grin and bear it. He wasn't as bad as he had been in the CFC or Wigan game but, having reffed hundreds of games in my time and fully understanding what causes controversy more than anything, he got away with an easy game. The Rags didn't set about attempting to maim our players, but had they done so I doubt Taylor would have delivered the same sanction he handed to Delph. It's conjecture, but it's what I believe. Taylor is not a referee whose performances could fill anyone with the notion of him delivering even-handedness nor is he seen as a beacon of impartiality.
As for the agenda police, I must hold a senior rank in this institution. I have seen enough over the last ten years where the club has been reviled, trashed, fined, ridiculed and treated in a way that varies markedly with the treatment afforded to other clubs and their players. We have tv looping any minor transgression by one of our players ahead or as part of any FA charge for misconduct, we have the constant snidey comments on 'the money' where, when said long enough and often enough, the perpetrators think the shit they are spreading might stink long enough for the 'impartial' governing bodies to come down and issue bans for players and massive fines for the club. Does it happen to other clubs in a similar fashion? No. Has it happened before that the best teams in the land have been a constant target of those for whom jealousy is a constant characteristic? Not in my experience it hasn't. Sniping questions at MCFC press conferences where the smart arses seek to embarrass and ridicule, questions that would never be asked at some other clubs for fear of the questioner being kicked off the premises on their arse. The list is ten years long. It won't be getting shorter in the future. We can go over the top with 'the agenda' but to suggest that we are treated in a similar fashion to other clubs is just, at best, a little naive.
W
W
worsleyweb
Guest
He did fine.
Bluekiwi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 3,817
- Location
- New Zealand (since 1974)
- Team supported
- Manchester City (from 1955) & Adelaide Crows (AFL)
Yes you did.Told you! ;)
A rule was broken.
At least he didn't say what many of us think about Alty so any punishment should be minimal