Fellaini unrepentant

[Chippy_boy]

Watching that elbow again, it's got to be in my all time top 10 worst fouls.

Sure, I have seen dozens more dangerous tackles including leg breaks. But 99% of the time they are caused by players being just too competitive and trying too hard to get the ball and being out of control. Of course you also get petulent little kicks or flicks when the player knows what he's doing.

But it is rare - very rare - that a player goes out to deliberately and cold bloodedly try to hurt an opponent like we see above. It's a truly dreadful challenge. In all honesty, I'd give this a 10 week ban if I was on the panel. Short of actually stopping to punch Zabba in the face, I don't know how it could be worse. Strike that, the fact that the thug then goes around saying it was an accident, does make it worse since it was so obviously not an accident.

And then gobbing at him as well, whilst he's on the deck. Utterly despicable. Make it 15 weeks.

 

[kenzie115]

He's definitely getting a ban for this.

The FA will no doubt have seen the elbow and been embarrassed by the media furore and their inability to act because the ref gave a yellow already. The spitting gives them all the opportunity they need to act.

I know we are suspicious of agenda's etc but now piss can has gone, I can't see them turning a blind eye to this. We shall see!

They don't need the spitting incident to ban him, if they wanted to they could review the incident regardless of the fact the ref gave a yellow card at the time. They don't usually because it undermines the ref but if it's a serious misjudgement they will.

 

[BringBackSwales]

Hasn't the head of the Premier League said today that the Premier League is a poorer place without the rags at the top of it? If they admit this on public what do them and the FA get up to in private? No agenda my fucking arse

 

[Bluep*ss]

Watching that elbow again, it's got to be in my all time top 10 worst fouls.

Sure, I have seen dozens more dangerous tackles including leg breaks. But 99% of the time they are caused by players being just too competitive and trying too hard to get the ball and being out of control. Of course you also get petulent little kicks or flicks when the player knows what he's doing.

But it is rare - very rare - that a player goes out to deliberately and cold bloodedly try to hurt an opponent like we see above. It's a truly dreadful challenge. In all honesty, I'd give this a 10 week ban if I was on the panel. Short of actually stopping to punch Zabba in the face, I don't know how it could be worse. Strike that, the fact that the thug then goes around saying it was an accident, does make it worse since it was so obviously not an accident.

And then gobbing at him as well, whilst he's on the deck. Utterly despicable. Make it 15 weeks.

We do call foreign refs but I will guarantee if that had been a European game he would have got a red.
Just trying to think of an incident and I can recall Beckham(rag) kicking that Argie on the back of the leg , with less force than my 3 year old daughter can manage and got a red but BogBrushHead only gets a yellow for what did amount to a "brutal Assault". The tw*t then claims ' Zabba's jaw ran into my elbow'. Cnut

 

[Edin’s header]

He's definitely getting a ban for this.

The FA will no doubt have seen the elbow and been embarrassed by the media furore and their inability to act because the ref gave a yellow already. The spitting gives them all the opportunity they need to act.

I know we are suspicious of agenda's etc but now piss can has gone, I can't see them turning a blind eye to this. We shall see!

They don't need the spitting incident to ban him, if they wanted to they could review the incident regardless of the fact the ref gave a yellow card at the time. They don't usually because it undermines the ref but if it's a serious misjudgement they will.

Correct mate. A la Ben Thatcher v Pedro Mendes.

Interestingly, although Dermot Gallagher only gave Thatcher a yellow at the time for Thatchers disgusting assault, City took their own immediate action and banned him for 6 matches and fined him heavily. That was before the FA banned him for 8 games. Can anyone see the rags taking their own internal action?

 

[Edin’s header]

Hasn't the head of the Premier League said today that the Premier League is a poorer place without the rags at the top of it? If they admit this on public what do them and the FA get up to in private? No agenda my fucking arse

Agree totally mate, but if you post this on the 'Scudamore' thread, you might have pigeonhole giving you his ten pennyworth :)

 

[kenzie115]

Hasn't the head of the Premier League said today that the Premier League is a poorer place without the rags at the top of it? If they admit this on public what do them and the FA get up to in private? No agenda my fucking arse

Whilst I'm sure the Premier League apply some pressure to the FA, it's worth remembering they are separate bodies.

 

[1961_vintage]

We got an entire week of Sky reshowing Kompany kicking a wall and Hart squaring up to a diving **** and fuck knows how many Mario incidents were shown every 20 minutes, but they don't seem remotely interested in getting Fellaini banned for his elbow and they don't even feel the need to mention the spitting. i honestly don't know how anyone can believe there is no bias

So if it was your business, would you be pissing-off 694m potential subscribers by showing it repeatedly? Only someone very stupid would do that.

Sky is a business. It knows what makes money - serving-up a Pravda-esque perspective on MUFC to plastic rag-loving fuckwits from around the country who suck it up like the brain-dead glory by remote association wankers that they are.

Not bias - business.

Knowing this, you either bin your subscription or take it for what it is.

 

[Sigh]

it has been said before - the FA are useless gits. They are so weak. They make up the rules as they go along.
If they follow this through by banning BogBrushhead I will "spit in my own face".
They will say the ref saw everything and gave a yellow so we won't do anything. T*ssers.
In law when someone gets a lenient sentence then the aggrieved can request some action, and in the past Judges have increased sentences. But this is the FA and will not do anything . Unless it is taken up by Sky and put the offence on a loop every 5 minutes.

I still want to know why the police are not looking at the forearm. That is not covered by the doctrine of implied consent, anymore than a player slicing someone with a razor blade during the game would be. Biting is also not covered and knacker did nothing there either...

Steve Davis does not give his implied consent to Alex Higgins poking him soundly in the gonads with a cue, though he does to Alex Higgins losing his marbles and whacking the white recklessly into his noggin in a fit of pique. Pablo does give his implied consent to being flattened in a challenge, or digs in the ribs, but he does not give his consent to a calculated sweep the leg Johnny.

If you read the FAs rules, they end with this piece of mendacity:

L. FAIR PLAY IN FOOTBALL
means that EVERYONE connected with football
• shows understanding of and respect for the Laws of the Game
• supports the belief that the game should be played in an entertaining and positive way
• behaves on and off the field in a sporting manner towards all others involved, be they
players, officials or spectators, irrespective of results.

And this is special.
E. CONDUCT
Misconduct
1. The Association may act against a Participant in respect of any “Misconduct”, which is
defined as being a breach of the following:
(a) the Laws of the Game;
(b) the Rules and Regulations of The Association and in particular Rules E3 to 28 below;
(c) the Statutes and Regulations of UEFA;
(d) the Statutes and Regulations of FIFA;
(e) the rules or regulations of an Affiliated Association or Competition;
(f) an order, requirement, direction or instruction of The Association.
2. The same facts or matters may constitute a breach of more than one rule, regulation, statute
or law referred to above, The Association may bring a charge or such charges as it sees fit.
General Behaviour
3. A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any
manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a
combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or
insulting words or behaviour.

Right. So, in the world of the FUCK ALL prosecutors and Judiciary where man is made for the Sabbath, rather than the Sabbath for man, they cannot do anything about the violent conduct because a clueless police officer fucked up and spitting at a person's head as he lying on the ground helpless after said conduct is NOT "insulting behavior".

 

[Plaything of the gods]

We got an entire week of Sky reshowing Kompany kicking a wall and Hart squaring up to a diving **** and fuck knows how many Mario incidents were shown every 20 minutes, but they don't seem remotely interested in getting Fellaini banned for his elbow and they don't even feel the need to mention the spitting. i honestly don't know how anyone can believe there is no bias

So if it was your business, would you be pissing-off 694m potential subscribers by showing it repeatedly? Only someone very stupid would do that.

Sky is a business. It knows what makes money - serving-up a Pravda-esque perspective on MUFC to plastic rag-loving fuckwits from around the country who suck it up like the brain-dead glory by remote association wankers that they are.

Not bias - business.

Knowing this, you either bin your subscription or take it for what it is.

This is absolutely correct. There is no agenda, no conspiracy, just the profit motive. Why does Sky not give wall-to-wall favourable coverage of Peterborough, Carlisle and Plymouth*? If you know the answer to that then you know why they give wall-to-wall favourable coverage of United, Liverpool and Arsenal*. One can live very easily without a Sky subscription. Very easily. And with calmness.

* I'm guessing here as I don't have and never have had Sky.