Callum McManaman escapes charge

[HelloCity]

Thatcher
Adebayor
Mario

**** off FA.

 

[Pigeonho]

Thatcher
Adebayor
Mario

**** off FA.

Clutching at straws including Thatcher. The dirty **** needed doing for what he did.

 

[mancunial]

This was whelans calling in his debt!

 

[Deleted member 52846]

The FA's ruling is wrong
Halsey and his team of officials were gutless
The FA should have made an exception to the rule for the worst tackle of the season
Martinez is a cünt for coming out with what he did
Whelan is a cünt for coming out with what he did
Macmanaman is a cünt for putting a lad in hospital

Massadio Haidara is within his rights to press charges for ABH. It was an abhorrent tackle and a farce of a fall-out from it.<br /><br />-- Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:31 pm --<br /><br />

Yes he did touch the ball. If he'd not made contact, but it had been close to it in any other country in the world this would have been a reckless challenge just for the studs up and possible booking. Haidara is not in control of the ball and can be said to be a 50/50 but McManaman's followed through. The challenge is reckless, dangerous and career threatening and deserved a red card. As for Mcmanaman being 'a bit green' this is the Premier League, one of the best and most competitive leagues in the world. Green or not, he's not playing for the Rose & Crown against The Red Lion.

Whether the officials see these incidents or not retrospective action has to be taken where needed. If the referee gets it wrong at the time then he gets it wrong. I don't see why this 'it's a slight on the ref if the FA don't back him up' still exists. I don't expect them to get every single decision right and we would all respect the FA more if they overturned decisions to get the right one. Also, the same should exist the other way round with sendings off rescinded if the ref's decision is clearly wrong because it's still 'if, in the opinion of the referee', which makes him right in ALL cases.

Here's a closing 'food for thought' question. McManaman touched the ball first before he studded Haidara, most people on here and the so called experts say it was a foul, (for me, to win the ball, you must do so cleanly i.e. without fouling the opponent before or after you touch the ball) but what would you or the experts have said if this happened inside the penalty area and the ball went from McManaman's boot straight out of play? IMO more experts would have said good challenge, he got the ball first, to me it would still be the same, a dangerous reckless foul deserving of a red card and a penalty.

Good post.

You can fully win the ball but it can be a red card tackle; just like on the flip side where you can be kicked yet you can still be booked for a dive. Things are not black and white where if you win the ball it's not a foul or if you're touched in the tackle it can't be a dive. These things are just not what reality is about.

 

[HelloCity]

Thatcher
Adebayor
Mario

**** off FA.

Clutching at straws including Thatcher. The dirty **** needed doing for what he did.

What are you talking about?

I agree that Thatcher deserved to be done. BUT he was booked for it during the game and banned later when the footage was reviewed.

My point is that we've had players banned before when the officials have blatantly seen the incident.

The officials saw the Mario and Adebayor incidents but did not see them 'clearly'. That's exactly what has happened with this latest tackle yet no action has been taken.

Where is the consistency/fairness?

 

[Pigeonho]

Thatcher
Adebayor
Mario

**** off FA.

Clutching at straws including Thatcher. The dirty **** needed doing for what he did.

What are you talking about?

I agree that Thatcher deserved to be done. BUT he was booked for it during the game and banned later when the footage was reviewed.

My point is that we've had players banned before when the officials have blatantly seen the incident.

The officials saw the Mario and Adebayor incidents but did not see them 'clearly'. That's exactly what has happened with this latest tackle yet no action has been taken.

Where is the consistency/fairness?

The difference between Thatcher and McManaman is obvious. Thatcher went out to destroy Mendes with his elbow with the ball being the second thing on his list of priorities. McManaman went for the ball but went in too high and without control. He should have been sent off retrospectively, but with an official having seen the incident at the time, he can't be done after. The change in the rule comes in some secondary phase which a bod from the FA was on Drivetime earlier to discuss it. He said when it's clear that violence has occurred they can review the incident and punish it retrospectively. In Adebayor's case and especially in Thatcher's case, violence occurred and the review was granted. That's how he explained it earlier and he used Thatcher as an example.
That's what i'm talking about.

 

[Millwallawayveteran1988]

The only thing that comes out of this is that Halsey is a fcking useless ref

 

[HelloCity]

If that's how they're judging it then fair enough but nobody would go into a tackle like that without intending to leave a 'calling card' and that means intending to hurt him.

 

[Pigeonho]

If that's how they're judging it then fair enough but nobody would go into a tackle like that without intending to leave a 'calling card' and that means intending to hurt him.

He said it's up to the panel or ref to determine if an incident is classed as violent or just a bad challenge. Mcmanaman's was the latter, whereas twats like Adebayor and Thatcher were obviously intent on causing harm, and rightly punished.
In truth, the rule needs changing and technology used. If the 4th official had looked at that live, he could have told the ref it was wreckless and worthy of a straight red, and the player would have got his marching orders and 3 game ban. Same with the Ade and Thatcher incidents, then they can get done extra afterwards.

 

[tidyman]

Thatcher
Adebayor
Mario

**** off FA.

Clutching at straws including Thatcher. The dirty **** needed doing for what he did.

What are you talking about?

I agree that Thatcher deserved to be done. BUT he was booked for it during the game and banned later when the footage was reviewed.

My point is that we've had players banned before when the officials have blatantly seen the incident.

The officials saw the Mario and Adebayor incidents but did not see them 'clearly'. That's exactly what has happened with this latest tackle yet no action has been taken.

Where is the consistency/fairness?

The whole system of what should and should not be reviewed retrospectively was re-examined before THIS season started. It was agreed by all interested organisations, including managers and players representatives. What happened in previous seasons is irrelevant.