Referees/Officials

[Barry Conlons wig]

I don't know what you game you were watching or whether you are a rag on the wind up. We should have had two penalties and I think the only person who thought your penalty was one was the official behind the net. None of our goals were offside, close yet but not offside. As for the phantom foul on Glik - you really are having a laugh

No I definitely thought theirs was a stonewall penalty, however they missed, agueros was a stonewall pen and it was taken out of our hands. UEFA bent as fuck

 

[Afrenchguy]

I don't know what you game you were watching or whether you are a rag on the wind up. We should have had two penalties and I think the only person who thought your penalty was one was the official behind the net. None of our goals were offside, close yet but not offside. As for the phantom foul on Glik - you really are having a laugh

Thats just some bad faith ^^

I didn't said that you were offside, i said that is was close and hard to call on real speed, like kun penalty, but at the end, all of this 3 actions was really well called by the ref.

And i dont know how you can discuss about the foul on Falcao, you must be blind ^^

davealvers : The main ref just talked to his 5th ref, who, for once, was usefull to something.

 

[SWP's back]

Thats just some bad faith ^^

I didn't said that you were offside, i said that is was close and hard to call on real speed, like kun penalty, but at the end, all of this 3 actions was really well called by the ref.

And i dont know how you can discuss about the foul on Falcao, you must be blind ^^

davealvers : The main ref just talked to his 5th ref, who, for once, was usefull to something.

Yeah. You're wrong. It was a penalty as every pundit in football also agreed.

 

[Eds]

Thats just some bad faith ^^

I didn't said that you were offside, i said that is was close and hard to call on real speed, like kun penalty, but at the end, all of this 3 actions was really well called by the ref.

And i dont know how you can discuss about the foul on Falcao, you must be blind ^^

davealvers : The main ref just talked to his 5th ref, who, for once, was usefull to something.

Tu as un rire mon ami

 

[JCB001]

You are joking, Shirley.

Dont understand why you think I was joking .It was a clear penalty.Or have I worded it incorectly

 

[Afrenchguy]

Yeah. You're wrong. It was a penalty as every pundit in football also agreed.

No i'm not. You guys can't read correctly?

Kun dive way before the contact, from this, its not a penalty. Blame kun, if he didnt dived, it was 100% a penalty.

Its just like your goals, i never said they were outside. I said it was tough to judge at full speed, since theyre on the same line than the ball, and i'm glad that the ref let the adv. to the attacking side. Just like Kun fault : Hard to judge but perfect call. That was my point.

 

[BlueMedic]

No i'm not. You guys can't read correctly?

Kun dive way before the contact, from this, its not a penalty. Blame kun, if he didnt dived, it was 100% a penalty.

Its just like your goals, i never said they were outside. I said it was tough to judge at full speed, since theyre on the same line than the ball, and i'm glad that the ref let the adv. to the attacking side. Just like Kun fault : Hard to judge but perfect call. That was my point.

If he hadn't "dived way before the contact" (which isn't true anyway), then the keeper would still have impeded his run - which is a foul. You don't watch City's games I imagine, but recently Sterling has stayed on his feet when being fouled & we've not been given penalties when they should have been; hence it's obvious why players make the contact obvious to make sure they get the penalty they deserve.

So yes, Aguero could have avoided the contact, but it still should've been a penalty as the keeper would've impeded him unfairly. One thing it categorically isn't, is a dive.

If you were going to argue anything, you should focus on the ball, there's an argument to be had that the keeper got the ball first - so at best for Monaco it was no penalty, but no dive. At worst it's a penalty & red card for the keeper. 9 times out of 10 that incident will be a penalty & red card for the keeper - Monaco were lucky, of that there's no doubt.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

BlueMedic
That I agree with. The booking was more offensive than the non-penalty call. I think it should have been one, as Aguero had nowhere to go and the sweeping leg blocked his movement while only getting a feather of a touch on the ball, but it wouldn't have been the worst I've seen not given. What you say about staying up/going over is also true - the players now have no idea what the ref is reffing.

The Monaco penalty - the wrong there was the 10 second gap to decide. Difficult to tell how much contact Otamendi made, but it looked plausible as a foul as Otamendi was the wrong side and behind..

 

[Afrenchguy]

If he hadn't "dived way before the contact" (which isn't true anyway), then the keeper would still have impeded his run - which is a foul. You don't watch City's games I imagine, but recently Sterling has stayed on his feet when being fouled & we've not been given penalties when they should have been; hence it's obvious why players make the contact obvious to make sure they get the penalty they deserve.

So yes, Aguero could have avoided the contact, but it still should've been a penalty as the keeper would've impeded him unfairly. One thing it categorically isn't, is a dive.

If you were going to argue anything, you should focus on the ball, there's an argument to be had that the keeper got the ball first - so at best for Monaco it was no penalty, but no dive. At worst it's a penalty & red card for the keeper. 9 times out of 10 that incident will be a penalty & red card for the keeper - Monaco were lucky, of that there's no doubt.

First, I agree, but that's not a foul then.

If you're outside, take the ball, and are obviously fouled in the area, is it a penalty? Well, no it isn't, since the first foul is you, being outside. It's exactly the same situation here.

Secondly, Unfortunately for you, I watched almost every game of City. I guess you are talking about Walker's foul? Should have been a penalty and a red card, yeah. But it's not a reason to change the rules for the next games. You can make the contact obvious if you want (it's risky tho), but here, he dived before the contact, once again. You can just stop frame by frame if you dont trust me.

You don't watch Monaco's games I imagine ( ;) ) but all season long, refs didnt does well for us. At PSG, they missed two clears handball and gave a penalty for almost nothing for them. Tho, i'm not blaming the ref for didnt call an outside on your goal, since there was no offside, even tough it was hard to judge at full speed.

 

[BlueMedic]

BlueMedic
That I agree with. The booking was more offensive than the non-penalty call. I think it should have been one, as Aguero had nowhere to go and the sweeping leg blocked his movement while only getting a feather of a touch on the ball, but it wouldn't have been the worst I've seen not given. What you say about staying up/going over is also true - the players now have no idea what the ref is reffing.

The Monaco penalty - the wrong there was the 10 second gap to decide. Difficult to tell how much contact Otamendi made, but it looked plausible as a foul as Otamendi was the wrong side and behind..

I think the best way to put it is that Monaco were lucky in both decisions. You could argue that both were correct (penalty decisions, not the yellow card) - but how often are they actually given that way?

The keeper skimmed the ball, no chance the ref saw that, he just guessed Aguero dived hence the booking - 9/10 times that's not seen & penalty is given.
Otamendi on Falcao again, it happens so often in games, think you can argue it was a good decision in hindsight, but when are they ever given? Especially by the 5th official. Again probably a 9/10 not given situation.