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.
Larrson Tackle On Garcia (GIF)
- Thread starter jrb
- Start date
Dubai Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 15,239
That rule doesn't exist anymore.Shirley said:hertsblue said:I see they were so quick to bring the new retrospective punishment into play for utd after the Fulham game and this should have had retrospective punishment also but usual sky and FA. Sky runs football not the FA. as Sky did not show it 24/7 like they did with the utd one it never happened so nothing done about it.
Sadly all too predictable
Similar thoughts myself but I suppose they are using the rule the ref seen it and decided no card was needed.
It's a case of City needing to be more vocal about sticking up for themselves. That includes the players at the time and the manager/staff after the match. Nothing gets done in this game unless you make an almighty fuss over it. That's not the way it should be, but that's the way it is and City need to start playing the game like everyone else does.
Don Karleone
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 22,474
- Team supported
- Vampire Squid FC
hertsblue said:I see they were so quick to bring the new retrospective punishment into play for utd after the Fulham game and this should have had retrospective punishment also but usual sky and FA. Sky runs football not the FA. as Sky did not show it 24/7 like they did with the utd one it never happened so nothing done about it.
Sadly all too predictable
Bang on the money.
warringtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 1,891
Christ, remember the Mario incident with "Scotty" fucking Parker?
The ref gave a free kick for that but sky had it shown from every angle, on the hour, every hour ( ably assisted by that twat Brazil & fucking Irani on the radio) then hey presto he gets a ban
The ref gave a free kick for that but sky had it shown from every angle, on the hour, every hour ( ably assisted by that twat Brazil & fucking Irani on the radio) then hey presto he gets a ban
Lucky Toma
Well-Known Member
Dubai Blue said:That rule doesn't exist anymore.Shirley said:hertsblue said:I see they were so quick to bring the new retrospective punishment into play for utd after the Fulham game and this should have had retrospective punishment also but usual sky and FA. Sky runs football not the FA. as Sky did not show it 24/7 like they did with the utd one it never happened so nothing done about it.
Sadly all too predictable
Similar thoughts myself but I suppose they are using the rule the ref seen it and decided no card was needed.
It's a case of City needing to be more vocal about sticking up for themselves. That includes the players at the time and the manager/staff after the match. Nothing gets done in this game unless you make an almighty fuss over it. That's not the way it should be, but that's the way it is and City need to start playing the game like everyone else does.
Agree 100% with you on this Dubai but in this instance what would we gain from it? If Larrson received a three game ban we'd be weakening Sunderland against Chelsea on Dec 4th.
prestonibbo_mcfc
Well-Known Member
Lucky Toma said:Dubai Blue said:That rule doesn't exist anymore.Shirley said:Similar thoughts myself but I suppose they are using the rule the ref seen it and decided no card was needed.
It's a case of City needing to be more vocal about sticking up for themselves. That includes the players at the time and the manager/staff after the match. Nothing gets done in this game unless you make an almighty fuss over it. That's not the way it should be, but that's the way it is and City need to start playing the game like everyone else does.
Agree 100% with you on this Dubai but in this instance what would we gain from it? If Larrson received a three game ban we'd be weakening Sunderland against Chelsea on Dec 4th.
And maybe our management are not a stupid as some would say and have thought this already.
So have decided to move on and worry about more important things, like effecting our next game
and sorting out OUR problems.
Dubai Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 15,239
You're right, and that may well have had an influence on City's decision to stay quiet this time.Lucky Toma said:Dubai Blue said:That rule doesn't exist anymore.Shirley said:Similar thoughts myself but I suppose they are using the rule the ref seen it and decided no card was needed.
It's a case of City needing to be more vocal about sticking up for themselves. That includes the players at the time and the manager/staff after the match. Nothing gets done in this game unless you make an almighty fuss over it. That's not the way it should be, but that's the way it is and City need to start playing the game like everyone else does.
Agree 100% with you on this Dubai but in this instance what would we gain from it? If Larrson received a three game ban we'd be weakening Sunderland against Chelsea on Dec 4th.
But I'm talking in more of a general sense; had our players reacted the way other teams greet such tackles, he'd have at least been booked and possibly sent off. And while we don't benefit directly from players receiving retrospective bans, it does prevent us from being seen as a soft touch in future instances.
Referees treat our club with so little respect because we treat them with too much; they know they can make howler after howler against City without any major repercussions because we give them a free ride. They don't feel under pressure when refereeing our games, and that's something that needs to change.
It's not a very palatable strategy, but every other team does it and our nicely nicely approach is getting us nowhere.
Plain Speaking
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 5,093
Pelligrini didnt even know of the incident in his post match radio interview on BBC. When the commentator questioned him about it, MP thought the commentator was referring to a foul Garcia had committed! There doesnt appear to be any pressure from the club to ensure match offifials are giving correct decisions for our club. We are repeatedly on the end of poor decisions that are costing us vital points. I would like to see more passion from MP to motivate the players, he looks like he's close to falling asleep on his bench.Dubai Blue said:You're right, and that may well have had an influence on City's decision to stay quiet this time.Lucky Toma said:Dubai Blue said:That rule doesn't exist anymore.
It's a case of City needing to be more vocal about sticking up for themselves. That includes the players at the time and the manager/staff after the match. Nothing gets done in this game unless you make an almighty fuss over it. That's not the way it should be, but that's the way it is and City need to start playing the game like everyone else does.
Agree 100% with you on this Dubai but in this instance what would we gain from it? If Larrson received a three game ban we'd be weakening Sunderland against Chelsea on Dec 4th.
But I'm talking in more of a general sense; had our players reacted the way other teams greet such tackles, he'd have at least been booked and possibly sent off. And while we don't benefit directly from players receiving retrospective bans, it does prevent us from being seen as a soft touch in future instances.
Referees treat our club with so little respect because we treat them with too much; they know they can make howler after howler against City without any major repercussions because we give them a free ride. They don't feel under pressure when refereeing our games, and that's something that needs to change.
It's not a very palatable strategy, but every other team does it and our nicely nicely approach is getting us nowhere.
Lucky Toma
Well-Known Member
Well it was time for his afternoon nap.
Dubai Blue said:You're right, and that may well have had an influence on City's decision to stay quiet this time.Lucky Toma said:Dubai Blue said:That rule doesn't exist anymore.
It's a case of City needing to be more vocal about sticking up for themselves. That includes the players at the time and the manager/staff after the match. Nothing gets done in this game unless you make an almighty fuss over it. That's not the way it should be, but that's the way it is and City need to start playing the game like everyone else does.
Agree 100% with you on this Dubai but in this instance what would we gain from it? If Larrson received a three game ban we'd be weakening Sunderland against Chelsea on Dec 4th.
But I'm talking in more of a general sense; had our players reacted the way other teams greet such tackles, he'd have at least been booked and possibly sent off. And while we don't benefit directly from players receiving retrospective bans, it does prevent us from being seen as a soft touch in future instances.
Referees treat our club with so little respect because we treat them with too much; they know they can make howler after howler against City without any major repercussions because we give them a free ride. They don't feel under pressure when refereeing our games, and that's something that needs to change.
It's not a very palatable strategy, but every other team does it and our nicely nicely approach is getting us nowhere.
Sums up my very thoughts mate. I hate the thought of having to harangue the officials and act like babies if we feel hard done by, but like you allude we're just treated like s**t otherwise.