squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
no, because maybe he believes he's a free loading lying waster who knows little about being a punditoakiecokie said:
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.
MOTD
- Thread starter johnny on the spot
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
Ban-jani said:oakiecokie said:bluealf said:Well we are getting a fair call from Danny Mills lol
Fucking waster get to fuck you bald twat (and I am bald)
Why ???? Because he has an opinion that doesn`t match yours.Therefore by your logic 50% of City fans are twats,seeing they also agreed with his thoughts on this forum earlier today.
It doesn't make them twats, it just makes them wrong.
Ah thats OK then.
BlueMooner87
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2008
- Messages
- 4,707
Exactly this is my view also.Inter Me Nan said:If that guy doesn't duck/move what happens to the ball?
If the player wasnt there at all it would be a goal, BUT as the player was there and had to move for the ball to go in the net even if it does not touch him he is therefore intefering with play, Good call ref but I do believe making the call made him lose his bottle and thats why toon had all their players on the field at the end of play.
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
squirtyflower said:no, because maybe he believes he's a free loading lying waster who knows little about being a punditoakiecokie said:bluealf said:Well we are getting a fair call from Danny Mills lol
Fucking waster get to fuck you bald twat (and I am bald)
Why ???? Because he has an opinion that doesn`t match yours.Therefore by your logic 50% of City fans are twats,seeing they also agreed with his thoughts on this forum earlier today.
Dont we all,squirty,don`t we all.And better Managers on here also. ;)
Bewar3them00n
Well-Known Member
To be honest, this is the most favourable I've heard him for City! I'd rather have someone with an opinion on than a BBC yes man, still prefer G.Neville and Souness though! Could be worse, you could have Ian Wright on, who hasn't a pair of brain cells to rub together!oakiecokie said:bluealf said:Well we are getting a fair call from Danny Mills lol
Fucking waster get to fuck you bald twat (and I am bald)
Why ???? Because he has an opinion that doesn`t match yours.Therefore by your logic 50% of City fans are twats,seeing they also agreed with his thoughts on this forum earlier today.
Again, I'm just highlighting Mills' poor attempt at an excuse.west didsblue said:Gouffran was in line with the direction of the ball but not in line with Hart's view of it. Goal should have been given. We should have only won 2-1, although I'm sure we'd have scored more if the ref had sent Yanga-Mbiwa off as he should have done.pudge said:I'm not trying to get into the debate of the call, I'm just saying the fact Gouffran ducks and moves out of the way of the ball tells me he was in some way in line with it.80s Shorts said:There is so much left to interpretation.
Yes he was in line with the ball but not blocking Harts vision.
He ducked, so was he interfering with play ?
imo offside should just be offside, no first phase , second phase, interfering or not, in the line of sight or not. Leaves too much room for error,
and certainly does not make the officials job any easier.
Contrary to the oracle that is Danny Mills
Gouffran was in line with the ball.
Imo, If he doesn't move then it hits him, offside. He moves out of the way whilst standing offside, he becomes active as he directly affects the path of the ball, offside.
squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
no we all don't, i think he's a lovely well balanced southerneroakiecokie said:squirtyflower said:no, because maybe he believes he's a free loading lying waster who knows little about being a punditoakiecokie said:Why ???? Because he has an opinion that doesn`t match yours.Therefore by your logic 50% of City fans are twats,seeing they also agreed with his thoughts on this forum earlier today.
Dont we all,squirty,don`t we all.And better Managers on here also. ;)
M
M
Mraitch
Guest
Mark Chapman quoted some of Law 11 that did not apply regarding line of site, just to try and strengthen the case against the officials. However he did not mention the section that says "making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, distracts an opponent" is classed as interfering with play. Hart was distracted by Gouffran. You can clearly see Hart start to move as though he is going to dive but stops as Gouffran ducks. Gouffran's movement distracts Hart.
It annoys me when laws are not correctly quoted to strengthen a case. It happened when Vinny was sent off against United and everyone kept saying a two footed challenge was a straight red when the Laws make no mention of two footed challenges.
It annoys me when laws are not correctly quoted to strengthen a case. It happened when Vinny was sent off against United and everyone kept saying a two footed challenge was a straight red when the Laws make no mention of two footed challenges.
kippax81
Well-Known Member
Incredibly I found myself sticking up for Danny Mills the other day.
My mate said he wasn't fit to fuck pigs........I said he was.<br /><br />-- Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:49 pm --<br /><br />Incredibly I found myself sticking up for Danny Mills the other day.
My mate said he wasn't fit to fuck pigs........I said he was.
My mate said he wasn't fit to fuck pigs........I said he was.<br /><br />-- Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:49 pm --<br /><br />Incredibly I found myself sticking up for Danny Mills the other day.
My mate said he wasn't fit to fuck pigs........I said he was.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.