He hasn't changed his tune. It's all from the same interview that you chose not to watch and instead just read a line or two from in the Star.oakiecokie said:Skashion said:oakiecokie, you've been proven wrong. You're making yourself look an idiot by pretending you never said something which you clearly did say.
Perhaps our Manager should keep to his original quotes and NOT change them every five minutes.Tell me then oh wise one,why would your manager say that Nasri would pay the "fine" if in his opinion he`s NOT guilty.
Thank you Ironside. ;)
SWP's back said:All of this.Dubai Blue said:oakiecokie said:I`ve never stated that he does agree with the red card
Really?
oakiecokie said:I don`t understand Mancini ref an appeal !! He claims that BOTH players should have walked
oakiecokie said:It doesn`t matter one iota what you or I think as Bobby is admitting that it was a sending off
oakiecokie said:So even Bobby agrees that it WAS a sending off
oakiecokie said:I was really pointing this out to all those Blue Moaners who have repeatadly stated on this thread,that it WASN`T a sending off. With Bobby now claiming it was,.......................
oakiecokie said:.........something which his own manager is now saying merited a sending off.
That's five separate occasions where you have quite explicitly stated that Mancini believes it was a red card.
You can debate the merits of Mancini making his comments at this time, and I agree that he should have kept his mouth shut by hiding behind the "we're appealing so can't comment" line.
But his comments are quite clear cut to me: i.e., "Nasri was stupid for jumping up and getting involved. He should have either stayed on the floor or simply walked away, and he will be disciplined for ignoring my repeated instructions not to get involved in situations like this. That said, his actions never merited a red card, and even if they did, surely the other player should have been sent off too. As such, we'll be appealing."
It didn't really take the detective work of Sherlock fucking Holmes Oakie. They are all from the last 5 pages.oakiecokie said:SWP's back said:All of this.Dubai Blue said:Really?
That's five separate occasions where you have quite explicitly stated that Mancini believes it was a red card.
You can debate the merits of Mancini making his comments at this time, and I agree that he should have kept his mouth shut by hiding behind the "we're appealing so can't comment" line.
But his comments are quite clear cut to me: i.e., "Nasri was stupid for jumping up and getting involved. He should have either stayed on the floor or simply walked away, and he will be disciplined for ignoring my repeated instructions not to get involved in situations like this. That said, his actions never merited a red card, and even if they did, surely the other player should have been sent off too. As such, we'll be appealing."
BNotice you didn`t do your homework and had to rely on other Spooks. ;)
SWP's back said:He hasn't changed his tune. It's all from the same interview that you chose not to watch and instead just read a line or two from in the Star.oakiecokie said:Skashion said:oakiecokie, you've been proven wrong. You're making yourself look an idiot by pretending you never said something which you clearly did say.
Perhaps our Manager should keep to his original quotes and NOT change them every five minutes.Tell me then oh wise one,why would your manager say that Nasri would pay the "fine" if in his opinion he`s NOT guilty.
Thank you Ironside. ;)
It is all in the same interview. SO no, he has not changed his tune.oakiecokie said:SWP's back said:He hasn't changed his tune. It's all from the same interview that you chose not to watch and instead just read a line or two from in the Star.oakiecokie said:Perhaps our Manager should keep to his original quotes and NOT change them every five minutes.Tell me then oh wise one,why would your manager say that Nasri would pay the "fine" if in his opinion he`s NOT guilty.
Thank you Ironside. ;)
Of course he`s changed his tune "a fine will be paid" What for if he`s innocent ?? Mancini should NOT have made any comments until he recieved the refs report and IMO he`s done more harm than good on the subject.
Here's why oh humility-devoid one.oakiecokie said:Perhaps our Manager should keep to his original quotes and NOT change them every five minutes.Tell me then oh wise one,why would your manager say that Nasri would pay the "fine" if in his opinion he`s NOT guilty.
Thank you Ironside. ;)
SWP's back said:It is all in the same interview. SO no, he has not changed his tune.oakiecokie said:SWP's back said:He hasn't changed his tune. It's all from the same interview that you chose not to watch and instead just read a line or two from in the Star.
Of course he`s changed his tune "a fine will be paid" What for if he`s innocent ?? Mancini should NOT have made any comments until he recieved the refs report and IMO he`s done more harm than good on the subject.
Are you being thick on purpose?oakiecokie said:SWP's back said:It is all in the same interview. SO no, he has not changed his tune.oakiecokie said:Of course he`s changed his tune "a fine will be paid" What for if he`s innocent ?? Mancini should NOT have made any comments until he recieved the refs report and IMO he`s done more harm than good on the subject.
So straight after the game he claimed it was not a sending off.In the next interview,to another source,he states "Samir will pay a fine" So in the space of 15 minutes after the game he has changed his tune.
Skashion said:Here's why oh humility-devoid one.oakiecokie said:Perhaps our Manager should keep to his original quotes and NOT change them every five minutes.Tell me then oh wise one,why would your manager say that Nasri would pay the "fine" if in his opinion he`s NOT guilty.
Thank you Ironside. ;)
Managers typically have many interviews after a match, and interviewers typically ask different questions prompting different responses. As long as they don't contradict what has previously been said, this is perfectly natural. At any rate, all the quotes came before this turd of an argument you've laid out for us. That you were unaware of all the quotes doesn't mean you get to blame Mancini. Mancini is not under obligation to deliver all quotes to you personally to ensure you don't look like an idiot on an internet forum.
Mancini is perfectly entitled to fine someone for actions which don't merit FA action. Do you see the FA banning Balotelli for missing Mancini's curfew? No, because that's nothing to do with them. He could fine someone for not training hard enough. Again, nothing to do with the FA. Mancini is entitled to fine his players merely for reacting badly. Mancini is entitled to fine players for getting offences which would be yellows if he wants. It doesn't mean he thinks it's a red.
Apparently oakiecokie is under the WRONG (that's for his benefit) impression that Mancini can only fine his players for getting red cards when we know that's not true.SWP's back said:Are you being thick on purpose?