Media bias against City

Status
Not open for further replies.
Says who? The ball was still in play when Stones up ended him.

Regardless a foul, is a foul, is a foul. Penalty no doubt about it. Can't believe this is even a debate.

I agree it's obvious - if it's a foul in the area, it's a penalty. where the player is in the area is irrelevant.
 
I don't even get the "he wasnt going anywhere" argument. The ball wasnt irretrievable, the defender had gone to ground. If he wasnt fouled he was in a great position to do something.
 
I don't even get the "he wasnt going anywhere" argument. The ball wasnt irretrievable, the defender had gone to ground. If he wasnt fouled he was in a great position to do something.

It's completely irrelevant. It was either a foul, in which case it's a penalty kick, or it wasn't/

The 'wasn't going anywhere' argument has one object only, namely to take some of the sting out of the argument that City were wrongly denied a clear penalty.
 
It's completely irrelevant. It was either a foul, in which case it's a penalty kick, or it wasn't/

The 'wasn't going anywhere' argument has one object only, namely to take some of the sting out of the argument that City were wrongly denied a clear penalty.

For wasn't going anywhere see unnatural arm position or not enough to make him go down etc.

Stop fucking interpreting the laws of the game and apply them instead and most of the controversy will disappear overnight.
 
This is why the media perception of our club matters.

With taggart, referees were scared not to give penalties. Had that been the rags at the swamp five years ago, that referee would know that if he wrongly refused to give the penalty he would be absolutely lambasted and it would be all over the media for days, and he will be refereeing at Scunthorpe the following week.

With us, he knows that even a complete stonewall like the one on sterling will have a few lines in the newspaper reports if he doesn't give it, and even though there is pretty much universal agreement that he should have given it, it will be forgotten about the day after tomorrow, and he will be refereeing a top flight game the next weekend.
 
It amuses me and amazes me that the Law on direct free kicks has taken on the added weight of 'pundit philosophising and analysing' to the point where people think it is now the law. Contact free kicks are awarded, or should be awarded as below:

A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

  • kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
  • trips or attempts to trip an opponent
  • jumps at an opponent
  • charges an opponent
  • strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
  • pushes an opponent
  • tackles an opponent

Take yer pick from that lot. Whatever happened at the death is adequately covered.

Rigger East, read, learn, inwardly digest. I look forward to the next penalty that this moron awards! I bet you a pound to a punt it's as soft as my left buttock!
 
It amuses me and amazes me that the Law on direct free kicks has taken on the added weight of 'pundit philosophising and analysing' to the point where people think it is now the law. Contact free kicks are awarded, or should be awarded as below:

A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

  • kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
  • trips or attempts to trip an opponent
  • jumps at an opponent
  • charges an opponent
  • strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
  • pushes an opponent
  • tackles an opponent

Take yer pick from that lot. Whatever happened at the death is adequately covered.

Rigger East, read, learn, inwardly digest. I look forward to the next penalty that this moron awards! I bet you a pound to a punt it's as soft as my left buttock!


And probably for the Rags !
 
This is why the media perception of our club matters.

With taggart, referees were scared not to give penalties. Had that been the rags at the swamp five years ago, that referee would know that if he wrongly refused to give the penalty he would be absolutely lambasted and it would be all over the media for days, and he will be refereeing at Scunthorpe the following week.

With us, he knows that even a complete stonewall like the one on sterling will have a few lines in the newspaper reports if he doesn't give it, and even though there is pretty much universal agreement that he should have given it, it will be forgotten about the day after tomorrow, and he will be refereeing a top flight game the next weekend.

And the chance of a top final would still be in line.

I remember Crappybugger reffing a Dipper derby. In added time he awarded a Red Dipper pen, straight up the other end and Joeloninho gets hauled down by St Jamie. No pen! Clear as the ex-bald spot on his head - a stoner. It was two whole seasons before Crapps reffed at Goodison. There is no transparency within the game re referees. We only hear about these instances when some ex-ref has a book out or a slot on a chat show and they want to make a humorous splash!
 
I don't think we'll get any decisions against Everton in cup if Liverpool beat Stoke the night before, as they will all want a Merseyside final
 
I don't think we'll get any decisions against Everton in cup if Liverpool beat Stoke the night before, as they will all want a Merseyside final

Are you suggesting that the tv companies and sponsors will want that dream game to maximise revenues and they would go out of their way to make it happen?

I think i know the answer unfortunately,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.