city v united

The Muppet

Harsh decision considering no contact was made.

zAbbo

therecklessone wrote:

Fully deserved card IMO, made not attempt to win the ball.

No problem with that red being shown, but its the consistency of referring, if thats a red, then there would be 2-3 red cards every game.

Not that I'm complaining

Villain

PHB wrote:

You are totally blind.
He went for the ball, and missed it, and didn't even touch the player, what the **** sort of decision is that?
****ing woeful reffing

Hold on that was a very dangerous tackle with intent to hurt a player and therefore a clear cut red card, it doesn't matter that he missed him the intent to cause harm was there.

Learn the rules before you call people blind :rolleyes:

Hobart

The Muppet wrote:

Harsh decision considering no contact was made.

You don't have to make contact. His intent was enough to get him sent off.

Lemlin

Rollo Tamasi wrote:

eh! who got sent off lads?

Cristiano Ronaldo.

PHB

I know the rules fully.
How the **** is the intend there, when the direction is for the ball?
How can you have intent, when your eyes are totally on the ball, and you don't go for the player?
How is that a red card? Explain to me how there is intent?

therecklessone

irish1 wrote:

Hold on that was a very dangerous tackle with intent to hurt a player and therefore a clear cut red card, it doesn't matter that he missed him the intent to cause harm was there.

Nail hit bang on head. Thanks.

Lemlin

Hobart wrote:

Deserved to go. What an asshole.

Whether a card or not, there's no need to refer to a player in that manner.

The Muppet

zabbo wrote:

No problem with that red being shown, but its the consistency of referring, if thats a red, then there would be 2-3 red cards every game.

Nail hit bang on head. Thanks.:)

MrJoeSoap

If your telling me he went for the ball there then he should never be allowed tackle again. Woeful attempt at a tackle.

Hobart

Lemlin wrote:

Whether a card or not, there's no need to refer to a player in that manner.

His actions as opposed to him.

PHB

Wait till you see the tackle again, and actually watch it instead of watching the reaction of the ref, and you'll see fully he wasn't going for the player.

The only thign wrong with that tackle is that the foot was high going in, but if you watch it, you see he puts the foot down when he is tryign to get the ball, and doesn't touch the player.

If there actually was intent there, why the **** didn't he cream him? Are you saying that he missed him?

The Muppet

Lemlin wrote:

Whether a card or not, there's no need to refer to a player in that manner.

Indeed users have been banned for less .

OTliddy

Pffff well I'm not going to get stressed about the premiership until Mourinho leaves Chelsea

Roar

i htought the card was harsh, he was late alright, but if he made contact with the ball it would have been a good tackle.. such a fine line really.. a yellow would have sufficied IMO

PHB

Go On Ruud, Go On

mike65

RVN scores...a draw then!

Mike.

Villain

PHB wrote:

I know the rules fully.
How the **** is the intend there, when the direction is for the ball?
How can you have intent, when your eyes are totally on the ball, and you don't go for the player?
How is that a red card? Explain to me how there is intent?

When you want to win a ball you slide in you don't jump in in a reckless manner like Ronaldo did, it was clearly an attempt to hurt the player, if a Liverpool did that on Ronaldo you would probably be the first to look for a red.

Now back to the game, Great goal by RVN!!

Roar

superb goal by ruud.
2-1, game on!

MrJoeSoap

2-1 Ruud vN

mike65

Fowler on!

Mike.

Lemlin

Will he miss the second leg against Blackburn now? On current form, I'd probably prefer if he didn't.

PHB

When you want to win a ball you slide in you don't jump in in a reckless manner like Ronaldo did, it was clearly an attempt to hurt the player, if a Liverpool did that on Ronaldo you would probably be the first to look for a red.

Why the hell not? Where in the rules does it say, you can't jump in towards the ball? Reckless is not an issue because it wasn't reckless, its only reckless if you get the player or intent was there!

It was a late tackle, thus can deserveda yellow, thats it. Considering the standerd of yellow cards not given in this game, the city handball, van nists hand ball, and the taclke from behind on Ronaldo which only had the goal of fouling ronaldo, it shouldn't have been given a yellow by the standerds that bennet had set. Obviously its a yellow in a proper refs book, but we don't seem to have a proper ref

Hobart

PHB wrote:

If there actually was intent there, why the **** didn't he cream him? Are you saying that he missed him?

Looking at his current form, probably.

fade2black

Hobart wrote:

Looking at his current form, probably.

MrJoeSoap

OTliddy wrote:

Pffff well I'm not going to get stressed about the premiership until Mourinho leaves Chelsea

What a great point. :rolleyes: Sure we might as well all give up.

scuba steve

Ronan|Raven wrote:

Harsh red card tbh.

ya very harsh, considering he was fouled not even a minute before that. And theres been worse tackles before and gotten away woth no yellow. That ref is a sour wankEr!

Villain

PHB wrote:

Why the hell not? Where in the rules does it say, you can't jump in towards the ball? Reckless is not an issue because it wasn't reckless, its only reckless if you get the player or intent was there!

It was a late tackle, thus can deserveda yellow, thats it. Considering the standerd of yellow cards not given in this game, the city handball, van nists hand ball, and the taclke from behind on Ronaldo which only had the goal of fouling ronaldo, it shouldn't have been given a yellow by the standerds that bennet had set. Obviously its a yellow in a proper refs book, but we don't seem to have a proper ref

Just saw the replay again, defo a red card he clearly jumped in with intent to hurt the player. You can see what you want to see in it, but I am sure if a Pool player did it you would be looking for a red.

Did you notice that Ronaldo didn't argue with the decision.

scuba steve

Ronan|Raven wrote:

Harsh red card tbh.

ya very harsh, considering he was fouled not even a minute before that. And theres been worse tackles before and gotten away woth no yellow. That ref is a sour wankEr!

scuba steve

MrJoeSoap wrote:

What a great point. :rolleyes: Sure we might as well all give up.

ha ha!

MrJoeSoap

scuba steve wrote:

ya very harsh, considering he was fouled not even a minute before that. And theres been worse tackles before and gotten away woth no yellow. That ref is a sour wankEr!

I think the fact that he was fouled was what made the referees decision up for him, it was clearly a tackle out of frustration.

Enjoy the week off by the way.

Villain

Silvestre is not having a good game at all.

PHB

Just saw the replay again, defo a red card he clearly jumped in with intent to hurt the player.

If he did, why the hell didn't he? Why didn't he hurt the player?
Ronaldo knocked the ball out, Ronaldo went for the ball, and Cole went around the ball, nowhere near where Ronaldo put in the taclke.

Also if that is a red card, how isn't the tackle just on Slyvestre a red? How the hell aren't any of these cards red? You set a standerd, you have to keep to it.

scuba steve

MrJoeSoap wrote:

I think the fact that he was fouled was what made the referees decision up for him, it was clearly a tackle out of frustration.

Enjoy the week off by the way.

ya but still, it could be the fact that Ronaldo does dive himself and makes big deals out of tackles aswell as the tackle that made the ref's mind up.
Yup, will enjoy week off if it happens!

mike65

Robbie Fowler Scores!!!!!!!!!!!

He may get a card for his celebrations.

Mike.

Hobart

Go on the Robbie!! YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!

Villain

3-1 Fowler all over, Fergie is finished.

phenom

3-1 Folwer scores a good goal.

Pacifico

Haha 3-1!!

What a finish!

scuba steve

irish1 wrote:

Silvestre is not having a good game at all.

nope,terrible game for him,
i totally agree with PHB

whiskeyman

Nice one !
My accumulator is off to a good start

Hobart

Pacifico wrote:

Haha 3-1!!

What a finish!

Brilliant finish. I'm delighted for Fowler. Especially as Neville was capt and all he had to say about him when Fowler was at Liverpool. Absoloutely delighted for him.

zAbbo

Get in there GOD, 3-1 and as usual Man City are good value for live games.

Tusky

bahahaha woooooo

Fair play City.

The Muppet

irish1 wrote:

3-1 Fowler all over, Fergie is finished.

Not a chance.

Well done city they deserved their win today.:(

The_B_Man

oh me jaysus

fade2black

United are just not good enough. There's no point in getting into arguments on here that are essentially pointless...once again they let their fans down when it matters most.

MrJoeSoap

Super win for City.

United this and that, take nothing away from the Blue boys.

Ireland for Ireland!

Guy:Incognito

Super finish from Robbie. What sthat saying about form being temporary, but class being permenant. God still has it.

Great result for Liverpool, 4 pts behind Utd now with 3 games in hand.

Chardee MacDennis

fowler you beauty, what a game!