Micah Richards the pundit

[@BluePhil8]

Anyone hear Simon Jordan on Talksport this morning, slacking off the Micah / Keane double act, said Micah is like a demented puppy.

I’m not one to comment on manhood but if Simon Jordan has anything other than a micropenis I’d be astounded. There’s nothing wrong with that. But his projection is so OTT.

 

[The Future is Blue]

Not sure what Micah was on about on Sunday when he said he thought City would win the PL because of the size of the squad. I'm sure the PL brought in another rule whereby we can only have the same number of players as everyone else otherwise we'd be cheating right?

 

[Bigga]

I'm pretty sure Micah meant quality/ strength in depth in comparison to everyone else.

Everyone has bleated for so long how we have two internationals for every position, so the quality is roughly the same to cover for injuries/ small Covid infections.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Not sure what Micah was on about on Sunday when he said he thought City would win the PL because of the size of the squad. I'm sure the PL brought in another rule whereby we can only have the same number of players as everyone else otherwise we'd be cheating right?

He may have been mixing up size and quality. He doesn't come across as the sharpest knife in the drawer at times...

 

[The Future is Blue]

He may have been mixing up size and quality. He doesn't come across as the sharpest knife in the drawer at times...

I was being a bit facitious there as I realised he really was thinking about quality of our squad. However Sly didn't correct this and some of their audience might think we actually do have more players to choose from than other teams. Not like Sly to cast City as using underhand tactics!

 

[ShaunMCFC]

Anyone hear Simon Jordan on Talksport this morning, slacking off the Micah / Keane double act, said Micah is like a demented puppy.

Simon Jordan somehow managed to come across as the bigger tosser when speaking to Kia Joorabchian. Self entitled knobhead, thinks cause he’s owned a football club his opinion is gospel. ****.

 

[shemnel]

well, how do BM feel about Micah's comments re Rodri?

"he's not got eyes in the back of his head", "i think that's an advantage" and then takes the Rio defence "maybe he should have just headed it".

not cool Micah

 

[Didsbury Dave]

well, how do BM feel about Micah's comments re Rodri?

"he's not got eyes in the back of his head", "i think that's an advantage" and then takes the Rio defence "maybe he should have just headed it".

not cool Micah

We've all gone mad about commentators being biased towards their own club in the past so I'd rather Micah remained objective.

He's not a great analyst though, to be honest.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

well, how do BM feel about Micah's comments re Rodri?

"he's not got eyes in the back of his head", "i think that's an advantage" and then takes the Rio defence "maybe he should have just headed it".

not cool Micah

He’s just another one (of many) who are being paid to talk about this sport on tele who doesn’t know the fucking laws of the game.

If you don’t know the laws simply say “I’m not sure of the law on this to be honest, I’ll have to read up on it”. A law isn’t open to opinion, it’s the law, so unless you know the law, keep yer trap shut!

It’s astonishing how nobody in the media has grasped that as soon as Mings chests it unchallenged (and it was unchallenged, Rodri was not interfering with play when Mings takes the ball under control:
)
...that means Rodri being offside before that moment is cancelled out because that phase of play with Rodri being offside has passed, it’s now a new phase of play now Mings has controlled the ball.

Rodri could only be judged to be offside if he’d challenged for the ball at that very moment in my image there^ when Mings was taking the ball in. Because, as the law states; “a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball”.

Rodri didn’t do this, as the picture shows. Everything that happens after Rodri didn’t interfere with Mings taking the ball in, is a fresh part of the game. Where he was stood previously to that doesn’t matter.

I posted this in the matchday thread when it happened, everyone I know in my City WhatsApp group said the same thing. We all knew the law and we’re just a group of random fans. Yet these pundits and presenters and Peter Walton [originally] and Villa manager and Villa players are all actually involved and paid VERY handsomely in jobs in this sport... and NONE of them know the law they’re paid to be experts in!

Micah, get on this thread, read this post and get it out there today that what you said last night was incorrect! You’re the only one who can do this because absolutely nobody else in the media will (Robbie Savage tried but actually circled - if you can call his 3 year old’s scribbling circling - the wrong part of the law!)

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

He’s just another one (of many) who are being paid to talk about this sport on tele who doesn’t know the fucking laws of the game.

If you don’t know the laws, keep her trap shut.

It’s astonishing how nobody in the media has grasped that as soon as Mings chests it unchallenged (and it was unchallenged, Rodri was not interfering with play when Mings takes the ball under control:
View attachment 8671)
...that means Rodri being offside before that moment is cancelled out because that phase of play with Rodri being offside has passed, it’s now a new phase of play now Mings has controlled the ball.

Rodri could only be judged to be offside if he’d challenged for the ball at that very moment in my image there^ as Mings was taking the ball in.

I posted this in the matchday thread when it happened, everyone I know in my City WhatsApp group said the same thing. We all knew the law and we’re just a group of random fans. Yet these pundits and presenters and Peter Walton [originally] and Villa manager and Villa players are all actually involved and paid VERY handsomely in jobs in this sport... and NONE of them know the law they’re paid to be experts in!

Micah, get on this thread, read this post and get it out there today that what you said last night was incorrect!

I agree that the ref's call was right. Ming's chest down was a poor touch - it set up a lose ball and he lost it.

But I'm not arsed at all what Mich say's about it. Football is full of interpretive rules and that was one where some refs would have blown up.

I would suggest that in all these circumstances - if you are relying on the ref to make a decision then you are taking a risk. A better touch from Mings and he hacks it clear unchallenged. He miscontrolled - allowed himself to be challenged and from that point he has to hope that the ref decides in his favour.