Clattenburg, the FA & Adebayor - proof that the system is bent

[Rolee]

I'm 20 I honestly don't remember it haha. If he did the same as Adebayor did then yes he should've been punished.

Do you understand the frustration in the inconsistency felt by City fans then? Do you get that we feel we are getting special treatment? I'm not one for conspiracies but when I see things like this I understand why these theories arise.

 

[bluemike]

Jacob's having a 'mare here.
The Tarquins have a statue of Henry celebrating the goal.

 

[Heisenberg's Blue Sky]

I believe that what you are saying is entirely true, however I don't think they're great examples to be using for your argument.

Firstly, the Adebayor "celebration" was an exceptional circumstance and the FA had to make it abundantly clear that they didn't want anything like it to ever happen again, so IMO they rightly made an example of him and punished him for it. I get that you're saying they worked around the rules by changing the name of the offence he was booked for, but I think they did the right thing in terms of it being a preventative measure.

The stamp from Adebayor: from the camera angle from behind Clattenburg's view - even in slow motion you can't really tell it's as bad a stamp as the other angles then show, therefore it's plausible that when he saw it in real time he didn't think anything of it, then having watched it back he realised the sinister intent behind it.

Similar to the Adebayor stamp is Aguero's elbow on Reid last weekend. Why are people trying to justify what he did by saying the ref saw it? Even if the ref did see it (again, heat of the moment might simply have missed it as it was a split second), he might simply have not thought anything of it, then changed his mind when he saw the replays later.

I think the rules are slightly flawed in that had Aguero been booked for that, he couldn't then have had a ban. What Aguero did was 100% wrong and nobody wants to see it in football, therefore it's right that he gets a ban for it. I'd want any footballer to be banned for that.

I agree there are a lot of unexplainable inconsistencies in the refereeing of football at all levels, but I think the only way to get rid of them is to get rid of human referees and make it all computerised. I'm sure we're heading that way which is good news. Aren't FIFA trialling semi-live video assistant referees at the minute?

 

[Jacob Smith]

Do you understand the frustration in the inconsistency felt by City fans then? Do you get that we feel we are getting special treatment? I'm not one for conspiracies but when I see things like this I understand why these theories arise.

Last paragraph of my post was about the inconsistencies. I share your frustration, my post was mainly about how those were bad examples rather than the point of the thread being wrong

 

[Rolee]

Last paragraph of my post was about the inconsistencies. I share your frustration, my post was mainly about how those were bad examples rather than the point of the thread being wrong

Your last paragraph is in relation to refereeing inconsistencies. I'm referring to inconsistencies at a higher level.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Sergio's retrospective 3 match ban got me thinking about the incompetence of referee Mariner. Firstly he was looking at the Aguero incident, but claimed not to have seen it. Another incident took pace in front of the East stand. The ball went out of play and both sides were claiming the throw. Mariner was stood 5-10 metres away, didn't have clue who to give the throw to, so he referred the decision to his linesman standing 50 metres away. Plainly you can't referee games if you have poor eyesight.

Watching that incident which I'd forgotten about from SS3 it was our throw but neither Mariner or the linesman had any idea so.........give it to West Ham.

 

[Blue Mooner]

I believe that what you are saying is entirely true, however I don't think they're great examples to be using for your argument.

Firstly, the Adebayor "celebration" was an exceptional circumstance and the FA had to make it abundantly clear that they didn't want anything like it to ever happen again, so IMO they rightly made an example of him and punished him for it. I get that you're saying they worked around the rules by changing the name of the offence he was booked for, but I think they did the right thing in terms of it being a preventative measure.

The stamp from Adebayor: from the camera angle from behind Clattenburg's view - even in slow motion you can't really tell it's as bad a stamp as the other angles then show, therefore it's plausible that when he saw it in real time he didn't think anything of it, then having watched it back he realised the sinister intent behind it.

Similar to the Adebayor stamp is Aguero's elbow on Reid last weekend. Why are people trying to justify what he did by saying the ref saw it? Even if the ref did see it (again, heat of the moment might simply have missed it as it was a split second), he might simply have not thought anything of it, then changed his mind when he saw the replays later.

I think the rules are slightly flawed in that had Aguero been booked for that, he couldn't then have had a ban. What Aguero did was 100% wrong and nobody wants to see it in football, therefore it's right that he gets a ban for it. I'd want any footballer to be banned for that.

I agree there are a lot of unexplainable inconsistencies in the refereeing of football at all levels, but I think the only way to get rid of them is to get rid of human referees and make it all computerised. I'm sure we're heading that way which is good news. Aren't FIFA trialling semi-live video assistant referees at the minute?

The point you're completely missing is whether the same changing of the rules would have applied were Adebeyor wearing a rag shirt, I think not. What about Rooney running towards the corner towards the City away fans after scoring that overhead kick off his shin pad? Was that not the same offence, or is it judged by how far you run? Can you point me to the rule that differentiates the respective incidents?

If there are rules what is the point of having them if when they don't suit the outcome you want you can change them or get people to lie so you can get the outcome you want?

The lack of media coverage of this absolutely astonishing admission by Halsey is pravda like. To win we have to overcome so many additional barriers and its making me hate the game I love. I refuse to abandon my club and let them win but I accept we are working to a different set of rules.

That said we should keep exposing this corruption everywhere we see it. Normal people now have platforms to get this stuff out to the wider public and we owe it to our club to do that.

 

[BlueTG]

To get back to the original point I have read all 19 pages and no one has mentioned the Rooney elbow a couple of seasons ago. Sorry cannot remember the game but it was clearly shown on screen, Clattenburg ignored it and FA later stated the ref had seen it but decided it was a coming together. Which was strange as the only contact was Rooney's elbow and the defender's ear with both of them jumping for the ball.

Rooney versus Wigan in 2012 or the year before at the DW.

Gerrard's against Cardiff in the League Cup final was also assault that was conveniently ignored and even defended by commentators.

 

[caseball]

I believe that what you are saying is entirely true, however I don't think they're great examples to be using for your argument.

Firstly, the Adebayor "celebration" was an exceptional circumstance and the FA had to make it abundantly clear that they didn't want anything like it to ever happen again, so IMO they rightly made an example of him and punished him for it. I get that you're saying they worked around the rules by changing the name of the offence he was booked for, but I think they did the right thing in terms of it being a preventative measure.

The stamp from Adebayor: from the camera angle from behind Clattenburg's view - even in slow motion you can't really tell it's as bad a stamp as the other angles then show, therefore it's plausible that when he saw it in real time he didn't think anything of it, then having watched it back he realised the sinister intent behind it.

Similar to the Adebayor stamp is Aguero's elbow on Reid last weekend. Why are people trying to justify what he did by saying the ref saw it? Even if the ref did see it (again, heat of the moment might simply have missed it as it was a split second), he might simply have not thought anything of it, then changed his mind when he saw the replays later.

I think the rules are slightly flawed in that had Aguero been booked for that, he couldn't then have had a ban. What Aguero did was 100% wrong and nobody wants to see it in football, therefore it's right that he gets a ban for it. I'd want any footballer to be banned for that.

I agree there are a lot of unexplainable inconsistencies in the refereeing of football at all levels, but I think the only way to get rid of them is to get rid of human referees and make it all computerised. I'm sure we're heading that way which is good news. Aren't FIFA trialling semi-live video assistant referees at the minute?

I think you need reminding of this one, Jacob.
The outrage was deafening. It's a special goal though in this case and a special celebration.
Maybe Arsenal are just bigger pussies than Spurs.
The other difference? Arsenal hated Adebayor more than Spurs hated Henry.




People aren't fed up with Aguero's punishment, people are fed up with the fact that retrospective action is a media-led response and the media are very selective about it.
City players always get picked up on these things, usually before the game's over.
So let's routinely have reds when other players do it and get away with a yellow. Because it is a red card offence.
The dirty play from Stoke on City the other week was more or less laughed off. A two-footed off the floor tackle. a punch thrown off the ball, a running headlock off the ball to take a City player out. All red card offences. Believe it or not, Mark Hughes was given the chance to complain about the ref and nobody objected. The media are very, very selective with their outrage. They must have had sleepless nights at the FA, PGMOL, Sky and all down Fleet Street over Suarez v Evra. They couldn't let them both off because the lovely, exemplary United full back demanded justice when he'd started it. United are obviously higher up the pecking order than Liverpool.

No authority of any kind should lie to achieve what some claim to be the right outcome. It's a morally bankrupt attitude. I wonder who you support.

 

[bobmcfc]

Sunday supplement discussing it after the commercial break now