CSKA Post Match Thread

[BillyShears]

For the people who are suggesting that we were robbed by a penalty decision, are they also taking into account how we were given an offside goal?

You can't have it both ways. You can't whinge about how officiating cost us when also not acknowledging that it greatly helped us. As Mister Appointment so elquently pointed out, that shit is what the rags and the rest of the wankers do.

The difference between the offside and the penalty decisions is pretty clear. The offside was so marginal even the replays are pretty much inconclusive because even if Zaba's a few inches in front of his marker, the centre half seems to be in line with him when the ball is played. Was pointed out in the after match analysis I watched. This is very different from the penalty incidents which were clear and visible in real time.

 

[blueinsa]

Was the referee at fault for the first goal? Or the inept performance in the second half?

We deserved nothing out of that game on the second half performance alone, stop looking to pass the blame to someone else

Ah, another piece of cliched shit, "we deserved nothing from the game on the second half performance"

You are allowed to win games playing poorly you know and let's be honest here, CSKA were hardly stinging Joes fingers all night were they?

OK mate you keep walking around with your dummy in about how poor old City are hard done to by all the officials, and ill park the blame at the manager for not making the right substitutions at key parts of the game, and also at the playing staff for giving the ball away time after time and not going into the second half with the right attitude.

The penalty was not a penalty, im not saying it was, but the fact is we were utter dross in the second half and that first goal was coming for about 20 minutes but what did we do about it? We carried on playing the same way, giving the ball away, getting caught up the pitch and letting panic set in.

That CSKA lad was right with what he said before the game, we are a soft touch at the back, we always give teams a chance, and he was proved right last night.

On another day Spurs could have had 3 or 4 on Saturday, but you will probably just see that we won the game 4-1.

I agree we were absolute fucking shit 2nd half and it needs to be sorted but that aside, we would have won the game had it not been for the ref. You harp on about the first goal like it cost us the game. It didn't, it made it 2-1. Shit goal to concede yes but not one that cost us the game.

The ref cost us the game end of with his blatant refusal to award us a stonewall penalty and send their lad off and for giving them an atrocious decision, one that was so fucking far fetched, nobody in world football can quite believe it.

As for Spurs, aye they could have had a few but then again, we could have had a lot more than 4. They didn't as we didn't but we won the game 4-1.

What else is there to look at?

 

[blueinsa]

For the people who are suggesting that we were robbed by a penalty decision, are they also taking into account how we were given an offside goal?

You can't have it both ways. You can't whinge about how officiating cost us when also not acknowledging that it greatly helped us. As Mister Appointment so elquently pointed out, that shit is what the rags and the rest of the wankers do.

The difference between the offside and the penalty decisions is pretty clear. The offside was so marginal even the replays are pretty much inconclusive because even if Zaba's a few inches in front of his marker, the centre half seems to be in line with him when the ball is played. Was pointed out in the after match analysis I watched. This is very different from the penalty incidents which were clear and visible in real time.

This.

Is it me or are some desperate to find anything to kick us in the balls with?

Not directed at Damo in particular btw but in general.

 

[Damocles]

For the people who are suggesting that we were robbed by a penalty decision, are they also taking into account how we were given an offside goal?

You can't have it both ways. You can't whinge about how officiating cost us when also not acknowledging that it greatly helped us. As Mister Appointment so elquently pointed out, that shit is what the rags and the rest of the wankers do.

The difference between the offside and the penalty decisions is pretty clear. The offside was so marginal even the replays are pretty much inconclusive because even if Zaba's a few inches in front of his marker, the centre half seems to be in line with him when the ball is played. Was pointed out in the after match analysis I watched. This is very different from the penalty incidents which were clear and visible in real time.

True but they both fall under the heading of bad decisions by the officials that benefited one of the teams.

I mean what exactly are people suggesting here? That there is a conspiracy amongst European referees to give bad decisions against City?

 

[BillyShears]

For the people who are suggesting that we were robbed by a penalty decision, are they also taking into account how we were given an offside goal?

You can't have it both ways. You can't whinge about how officiating cost us when also not acknowledging that it greatly helped us. As Mister Appointment so elquently pointed out, that shit is what the rags and the rest of the wankers do.

The difference between the offside and the penalty decisions is pretty clear. The offside was so marginal even the replays are pretty much inconclusive because even if Zaba's a few inches in front of his marker, the centre half seems to be in line with him when the ball is played. Was pointed out in the after match analysis I watched. This is very different from the penalty incidents which were clear and visible in real time.

This.

Is it me or are some desperate to find anything to kick us in the balls with?

Not directed at Damo in particular btw but in general.

Said it all in my post on the previous page. Seems to be a small group who act like they're Mark Ogden on Twitter. See and highlight only the negative about City in the most inflammatory of ways. We're shit/wank/fucked/clueless blah blah blah. The manager's a clown the captains not a leader the midfielders are all lazy. It's an endless cycle of negative sewage.

 

[tonea2003]

Ah, another piece of cliched shit, "we deserved nothing from the game on the second half performance"

You are allowed to win games playing poorly you know and let's be honest here, CSKA were hardly stinging Joes fingers all night were they?

OK mate you keep walking around with your dummy in about how poor old City are hard done to by all the officials, and ill park the blame at the manager for not making the right substitutions at key parts of the game, and also at the playing staff for giving the ball away time after time and not going into the second half with the right attitude.

The penalty was not a penalty, im not saying it was, but the fact is we were utter dross in the second half and that first goal was coming for about 20 minutes but what did we do about it? We carried on playing the same way, giving the ball away, getting caught up the pitch and letting panic set in.

That CSKA lad was right with what he said before the game, we are a soft touch at the back, we always give teams a chance, and he was proved right last night.

On another day Spurs could have had 3 or 4 on Saturday, but you will probably just see that we won the game 4-1.

I agree we were absolute fucking shit 2nd half and it needs to be sorted but that aside, we would have won the game had it not been for the ref. You harp on about the first goal like it cost us the game. It didn't, it made it 2-1. Shit goal to concede yes but not one that cost us the game.

The ref cost us the game end of with his blatant refusal to award us a stonewall penalty and send their lad off and for giving them an atrocious decision, one that was so fucking far fetched, nobody in world football can quite believe it.

As for Spurs, aye they could have had a few but then again, we could have had a lot more than 4. They didn't as we didn't but we won the game 4-1.

What else is there to look at?

you are looking at the only reason for the draw is the ref which is simply not true

there was 20 minutes between the 2 goals in which we could have gone on to score a third, we didn't as we were awful. no one to blame apart from ourselves

 

[chris85mcfc]

Ah, another piece of cliched shit, "we deserved nothing from the game on the second half performance"

You are allowed to win games playing poorly you know and let's be honest here, CSKA were hardly stinging Joes fingers all night were they?

OK mate you keep walking around with your dummy in about how poor old City are hard done to by all the officials, and ill park the blame at the manager for not making the right substitutions at key parts of the game, and also at the playing staff for giving the ball away time after time and not going into the second half with the right attitude.

The penalty was not a penalty, im not saying it was, but the fact is we were utter dross in the second half and that first goal was coming for about 20 minutes but what did we do about it? We carried on playing the same way, giving the ball away, getting caught up the pitch and letting panic set in.

That CSKA lad was right with what he said before the game, we are a soft touch at the back, we always give teams a chance, and he was proved right last night.

On another day Spurs could have had 3 or 4 on Saturday, but you will probably just see that we won the game 4-1.

I agree we were absolute fucking shit 2nd half and it needs to be sorted but that aside, we would have won the game had it not been for the ref. You harp on about the first goal like it cost us the game. It didn't, it made it 2-1. Shit goal to concede yes but not one that cost us the game.

The ref cost us the game end of with his blatant refusal to award us a stonewall penalty and send their lad off and for giving them an atrocious decision, one that was so fucking far fetched, nobody in world football can quite believe it.

As for Spurs, aye they could have had a few but then again, we could have had a lot more than 4. They didn't as we didn't but we won the game 4-1.

What else is there to look at?

No the first goal didn't cost us the game, but what it did do was hand them the initiative and a lifeline and lets be honest it wasn't a goal out of nothing as they had carved us open a couple of times just before that.

The fact is we should have brought Fernandinho on earlier to tighten it up in the middle of the pitch, and that's not hindsight talking as I said to my Dad at HT that was what we should have done, and then played keep ball and completely stifle the game.

You're making it out as if I agree with the penalty decisions, he got them both wrong, and yes they should have had a man sent off. But in football you can't play the game that way, you play the hand your dealt, and at 2-0 up at HT and cruising there is no way we should have come away from that game with less than 3 points regardless of a shocking penalty decision, everything leading up to their first goal was shocking, from then on it was just a matter of time before they got the 2nd, regardless of how it came about.

 

[chris85mcfc]

OK mate you keep walking around with your dummy in about how poor old City are hard done to by all the officials, and ill park the blame at the manager for not making the right substitutions at key parts of the game, and also at the playing staff for giving the ball away time after time and not going into the second half with the right attitude.

The penalty was not a penalty, im not saying it was, but the fact is we were utter dross in the second half and that first goal was coming for about 20 minutes but what did we do about it? We carried on playing the same way, giving the ball away, getting caught up the pitch and letting panic set in.

That CSKA lad was right with what he said before the game, we are a soft touch at the back, we always give teams a chance, and he was proved right last night.

On another day Spurs could have had 3 or 4 on Saturday, but you will probably just see that we won the game 4-1.

I agree we were absolute fucking shit 2nd half and it needs to be sorted but that aside, we would have won the game had it not been for the ref. You harp on about the first goal like it cost us the game. It didn't, it made it 2-1. Shit goal to concede yes but not one that cost us the game.

The ref cost us the game end of with his blatant refusal to award us a stonewall penalty and send their lad off and for giving them an atrocious decision, one that was so fucking far fetched, nobody in world football can quite believe it.

As for Spurs, aye they could have had a few but then again, we could have had a lot more than 4. They didn't as we didn't but we won the game 4-1.

What else is there to look at?

you are looking at the only reason for the draw is the ref which is simply not true

there was 20 minutes between the 2 goals in which we could have gone on to score a third, we didn't as we were awful. no one to blame apart from ourselves

Correct

 

[BillyShears]

True but they both fall under the heading of bad decisions by the officials that benefited one of the teams.

No they don't. The rule is that if the linesman is in doubt the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking player. There was significant doubt even when the replay was frozen so it goes without saying in real time the linesman made the correct call which was to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker.

The penalties are totally different as I've already explained because the decisions were both wrong and both incidents were beyond any doubt. Hell IMO we should've had two pens because the challenge on Milner after his shot was a foul and booking too!

I mean what exactly are people suggesting here? That there is a conspiracy amongst European referees to give bad decisions against City?

I'm not suggesting anything other than last night the result came about as a direct result of another awful refereeing display in Europe. It happened to Chelsea a lot as well in their initial forays into Europe after Roman's takeover. Conspiracy? No. Ineptness? Most definitely.

 

[chris85mcfc]

True but they both fall under the heading of bad decisions by the officials that benefited one of the teams.

No they don't. The rule is that if the linesman is in doubt the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking player. There was significant doubt even when the replay was frozen so it goes without saying in real time the linesman made the correct call which was to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker.

The penalties are totally different as I've already explained because the decisions were both wrong and both incidents were beyond any doubt. Hell IMO we should've had two pens because the challenge on Milner after his shot was a foul and booking too!

I mean what exactly are people suggesting here? That there is a conspiracy amongst European referees to give bad decisions against City?

I'm not suggesting anything other than last night the result came about as a direct result of another awful refereeing display in Europe. It happened to Chelsea a lot as well in their initial forays into Europe after Roman's takeover. Conspiracy? No. Ineptness? Most definitely.

So do we have to wait for refereeing to improve before we can be successful in Europe?

Or is there just a small chance that perhaps we could look at ourselves and what we can do to win a game