pee dubyas crayons
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 856
If you ignore the Adebayor stamp on McShane IMO it makes FA Watch look very biased.
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.
FA Watch
- Thread starter Montgomery Burns
- Start date
Montgomery Burns
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2007
- Messages
- 514
pee dubyas crayons said:If you ignore the Adebayor stamp on McShane IMO it makes FA Watch look very biased.
You made precisely the same point on page 101 on Saturday night and my response was the next post down - I'm surprised you missed it, as it was quite clear.
Indeed the same point was raised on the FA Watch site on Sunday morning and as I said at the time I have no problem in following it and other incidents up, but since I didn't recall it myself from seeing the match live at COMS I was relying on seeing links to the incident, which I asked for on two occasions.
I haven't heard anything which is why I haven't taken the issue forward, unlike with the case of Fellaini when a clip was sent.
If Adebayor has stamped on McShane I would WANT to take it forward, in part because of the credibility issues you imply. But I need some assistance to do this, and to simply ignore my response to precisely the same point you raised before does not really help.
Montgomery Burns
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2007
- Messages
- 514
Patrick Barclay of The Guardian has been in touch re the Fellaini incident, touching base.
It looks like he may keep a watching brief so to speak, and at least doesn't appear hostile like Martin Samuel of the Mail.
It looks like he may keep a watching brief so to speak, and at least doesn't appear hostile like Martin Samuel of the Mail.
squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
patrick barclay is an intelligent journalist who is well respected in the industryMark Tipton said:Patrick Barclay of The Guardian has been in touch re the Fellaini incident, touching base.
It looks like he may keep a watching brief so to speak, and at least doesn't appear hostile like Martin Samuel of the Mail.
Montgomery Burns
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2007
- Messages
- 514
We now have a response from the FA on the Fellaini incident, as follows:
An FA spokesman said: “We are only able to take retrospective disciplinary action in cases which are not seen by match officials. The incident to which you refer was seen by the match referee and therefore outside of any FA jurisdiction. We will not re-referee the incident.”
They're quite clear then - Mr Wiley saw it and he''s OK with it - remember, he didn't even give a foul!
Unbelievable!
An FA spokesman said: “We are only able to take retrospective disciplinary action in cases which are not seen by match officials. The incident to which you refer was seen by the match referee and therefore outside of any FA jurisdiction. We will not re-referee the incident.”
They're quite clear then - Mr Wiley saw it and he''s OK with it - remember, he didn't even give a foul!
Unbelievable!
squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
so basically they are say they can do whatever they want whenever they feel like itMark Tipton said:We now have a response from the FA on the Fellaini incident, as follows:
An FA spokesman said: “We are only able to take retrospective disciplinary action in cases which are not seen by match officials. The incident to which you refer was seen by the match referee and therefore outside of any FA jurisdiction. We will not re-referee the incident.”
They're quite clear then - Mr Wiley saw it and he''s OK with it - remember, he didn't even give a foul!
Unbelievable!
LCBblue
Well-Known Member
Absolutely ludicrous! WTF is happening in the modern dya football associaiton!Mark Tipton said:We now have a response from the FA on the Fellaini incident, as follows:
An FA spokesman said: “We are only able to take retrospective disciplinary action in cases which are not seen by match officials. The incident to which you refer was seen by the match referee and therefore outside of any FA jurisdiction. We will not re-referee the incident.”
They're quite clear then - Mr Wiley saw it and he''s OK with it - remember, he didn't even give a foul!
Unbelievable!
Montgomery Burns
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2007
- Messages
- 514
We have now got recognition from the FA, in so much that all future requests should go via their Press Office via direct e-mail rather than having to go through the tortuous process of contacting their Customer Relations Team by online form.
They are doing this because they've realised at long last we're publishing their replies online at the FA Watch site, and elsewhere.
It's progress by small steps at least.
Mark
They are doing this because they've realised at long last we're publishing their replies online at the FA Watch site, and elsewhere.
It's progress by small steps at least.
Mark
KenTheLandlord
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2009
- Messages
- 4,256
Mark Tipton said:We now have a response from the FA on the Fellaini incident, as follows:
An FA spokesman said: “We are only able to take retrospective disciplinary action in cases which are not seen by match officials. The incident to which you refer was seen by the match referee and therefore outside of any FA jurisdiction. We will not re-referee the incident.”
They're quite clear then - Mr Wiley saw it and he''s OK with it - remember, he didn't even give a foul!
Unbelievable!
Was it not mentioned a couple of weeks ago, that if the FA thought an incident was sufficiently bad to warrant an increase in punishment, they would take action? That implies wether the ref saw the incident or not. Now, under anyone's book that was violent conduct and hence a 3 match ban?
City Raider
Well-Known Member
Mark Tipton said:We have now got recognition from the FA, in so much that all future requests should go via their Press Office via direct e-mail rather than having to go through the tortuous process of contacting their Customer Relations Team by online form.
They are doing this because they've realised at long last we're publishing their replies online at the FA Watch site, and elsewhere.
It's progress by small steps at least.
Mark
Great work