Shawcross claims innoncence (Sky Sports)

[MysticalDescent]

Some of you lot have clearly never been smacked very hard in the thorax.

Instead of blaming Shawcross and Fuller, how about asking why Adebayor decided to swing his arm at Shawcross with ONE intention only?

 

[mancunial]

red card my arse,if any city fan thinks that was a red card then you have to take a long look at where your loyalty lies, he went down like the shithouse he is, a cheat end of?

 

[Corky]

Some of you lot have clearly never been smacked very hard in the thorax.

Instead of blaming Shawcross and Fuller, how about asking why Adebayor decided to swing his arm at Shawcross with ONE intention only?

It is a hand off, Gaza used to do it all the time, not even a free kick when a player is clearly coming in to foul you.

 

[pardoe]

red card my arse,if any city fan thinks that was a red card then you have to take a long look at where your loyalty lies, he went down like the shithouse he is, a cheat end of?

This sort of thing sums up what's wrong with elements of our support.

You can't say it was deserving of a red card without being disloyal?!?

Grow up.

 

[deJong_Ones]

there was absolutely no venom in it whatsoever, it looked pretty pathetic in fact. If a Stoke player had done it, mixed in with the rest of their aggressive physical play, then there's no chance it would've been a red. They might have thought a yellow was a bit harsh

 

[pardoe]

there was absolutely no venom in it whatsoever, it looked pretty pathetic in fact. If a Stoke player had done it, mixed in with the rest of their aggressive physical play, then there's no chance it would've been a red. They might have thought a yellow was a bit harsh

You don't see how whenever hands are raised there's a serious chance an official may dish out a red?

Why did his hands need to be where they were?

 

[deJong_Ones]

there was absolutely no venom in it whatsoever, it looked pretty pathetic in fact. If a Stoke player had done it, mixed in with the rest of their aggressive physical play, then there's no chance it would've been a red. They might have thought a yellow was a bit harsh

You don't see how whenever hands are raised there's a serious chance an official may dish out a red?

Why did his hands need to be where they were?

whenever you raise your hands you're playing with fire, and so it was a stupid thing for Adebayor to do. But judged on the severity of the incident i thought a red was very, very harsh

 

[bluemoonmatt]

red card my arse,if any city fan thinks that was a red card then you have to take a long look at where your loyalty lies, he went down like the shithouse he is, a cheat end of?

This sort of thing sums up what's wrong with elements of our support.

You can't say it was deserving of a red card without being disloyal?!?

Grow up.

Are you on a wimd up. Fair do's mancunials reasoning of why it shouldn't have been a red is silly but he is right, it shouldn't have been a red and if it is then you will see teams down to 8 a peice by full time.

Adebayor received the ball to his feet with his back to goal, shawcross challenged once (from behind, I'll let you tell me what the rule regarding that is). Ade had his arm back and held/shoved Shawcross off in the chest. He bought himself another touch and the same challenge occured. This time Ade hold off/shove was on Shawcross collar bone area, resulting in Shawcross going down like a sack of faecal matter. Now explain to me where the Violent conduct occured. It didn't, simple as. In fact if the laws of the game were to be applied Shawcross could easily have found himself penalised for either the tackle from behind (again though if this was given the ref would never have his whistle out of his mouth) or for simulation.

To add insult to injury Bellers runs a line in between the two Stoke CBs who (as is there right) close the gap. What isn't their right is for one of em (huth) to swing his elbow in the direction of Bellamy's neck. Not saying this was a red either, but it was certainly a stronger case.

 

[mancunial]

Re: Shawcross claims innocence (Sky Sports)

you are wrong pardoe, you are the type of city fan who thinks the opposition can,t do no wrong ( i back city you surrender) it was not a red card, it is because of your type of support we lack bottle? and i will say this to you do not insult me by your suggestion that i am a juvenile it was uncalled for?

red card my arse,if any city fan thinks that was a red card then you have to take a long look at where your loyalty lies, he went down like the shithouse he is, a cheat end of?

This sort of thing sums up what's wrong with elements of our support.

You can't say it was deserving of a red card without being disloyal?!?

Grow up.

 

[avoidconfusion]

Are you on a wimd up. Fair do's mancunials reasoning of why it shouldn't have been a red is silly but he is right, it shouldn't have been a red and if it is then you will see teams down to 8 a peice by full time.

Adebayor received the ball to his feet with his back to goal, shawcross challenged once (from behind, I'll let you tell me what the rule regarding that is). Ade had his arm back and held/shoved Shawcross off in the chest. He bought himself another touch and the same challenge occured. This time Ade hold off/shove was on Shawcross collar bone area, resulting in Shawcross going down like a sack of faecal matter. Now explain to me where the Violent conduct occured. It didn't, simple as. In fact if the laws of the game were to be applied Shawcross could easily have found himself penalised for either the tackle from behind (again though if this was given the ref would never have his whistle out of his mouth) or for simulation.

To add insult to injury Bellers runs a line in between the two Stoke CBs who (as is there right) close the gap. What isn't their right is for one of em (huth) to swing his elbow in the direction of Bellamy's neck. Not saying this was a red either, but it was certainly a stronger case.

That sums it up perfectly.