Chelsea V Liverpool.

[chaddblue]

So Sky say Costa stamps nothing, yellow at worst pmsl.

Not a fucking chance is he going to get the witch hunt treatment, not a chance.

Eh? What Sky are you watching?

Sky Sports News with Walsh and Cascarino said yellow at most

Do you mean Tony 'ex Chelsea player and Chelsea fan' Cascarino?

 

[Questy]

If Costa isn't given a retrospective ban, surely we should be getting one or two players to constantly wind him up throughout the game, I'm sure we can get the prick sent off in the first half.

Mangala would do it on his own

 

[jimharri]

So Sky say Costa stamps nothing, yellow at worst pmsl.

Not a fucking chance is he going to get the witch hunt treatment, not a chance.

Eh? What Sky are you watching?

Sky Sports News with Walsh and Cascarino said yellow at most

Fair enough. I was watching the coverage a the ground. Henry and Redknapp jnr, at the game, bothsaid a definite red card. Not sure how Cascarino and Walsh saw it as only a yellow to be honest.

 

[cookster]

Do you really believe this? Costa the guy who has scored in cup finals against Madrid, against Chelsea in the Champions League final and is currently the top goal scorer in the league cannot do it against the big boys?

He should have been sent off today and crossed the line, but Chelsea's bigger problem is that Fabregas actually does go missing in the big games.

If Costa gets banned then City have a huge advantage for the game on Saturday. Both teams are not actually in great form at the moment. The difference could be Yaya coming back or whether Hazard has a great game.

With Sturridge things might have been different. Lucas was great and so was Coutinho. When you look at the Brazilians playing today that could not play for Brazil it makes you realise just how stupid Scolari was. Ironically even with their best team, which is probably the second best in the world they probably still would have ended, though in less embarassing circumstances, with a loss to Germany in the semi final.

You're right I type things I don't believe.

Sometimes I say things in the heat of the moment, but change my mind when I calmed down. Sometimes I exaggerate my point then realise I have gone too far. Costa has just twice stamped on someone.

If you mean it then fair enough, but the stats and just watching the big games don't support that conclusion at all.

By stats do you mean a 1 in 3 record during his career or 1 goal from 9 internationals. Flat track bully who can be easily controlled by a good Central Defender.

 

[bitsmith]

Would be great if Costa would be banned and Fabregas injured. That's 2 of their 3 best players, similar what we will miss in Yaya and Nasri.

 

[moon]

If Costa isn't given a retrospective ban, surely we should be getting one or two players to constantly wind him up throughout the game, I'm sure we can get the prick sent off in the first half.

Mangala would do it on his own

Costa managed to get Zabba wound up and he got sent off instead and he has got away with a lot this season

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Who is that 'one pundit on Sky' who drives that so called, ehm, campaign against Chelsea in the media? Genuine question cause I've got no idea. The whole world is claiming that Costa's actions were accidental tonight, so I can hardly see that lonely pundit...

Not quite. Just a few early stories. Telegraph: Costa injustice shows need for video replays. Independent: 2 stamps executed like a trained assassin. Daily Mail: stamp-red. Express: Costa not punished despite double stamp. Mirror: Costa lucky to escape red for two stamping incidents.

 

[Ric]

Most of tomorrow's back pages are saying he could face retrospective action.

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

There's got to be room for a citing rule in our game.

 

[kinkysdribble]

If Costa was to get a retrospective ban Chelsea would just appeal last minute allowing him toplay on Saturday, and risk increasing his ban for a frivolous appeal!