Adebayor (Mod warning Post #35)

The Muppet

Headshot wrote: »

Adebayor has been charged twice

for the stamp and celebration

souce ssn


delighted

When will the hearing be held?

Mitch Connor

Mr Alan wrote: »

Not sure where you're getting those stats?

I was talking about the league. Torres had 20 starts & 4 sub appearances and got 14 goals, thats sensational by anyone standards, incl. his own.

Thing about Torres, even when he is not playing well, very often he still scores-take this year for example, he has been pretty awful so far, yet still has 3 goals in 5 games.

Adebayour sulked last year, there ain't much doubt about that.

*mitch, take minutes, or appearances, the stats are deadly, end of discussion :cool:

it is yeah, i just found it amusing. His end to the season was incredible from a goal scoring perspective.

Headshot

The Muppet wrote: »

When will the hearing be held?

I think thursday


violent conduct for the stamp and improper conduct for the celebration

Frisbee

Lemlin wrote: »

Arsenal fans seem to be eager to vilify Adeyabor and aren't willing to accept that his performance level may just have dropped from the lofty heights of the season before.

This. It's always going to be hard to duplicate a 30 goal season, especially when two of your main providers in Rosicky and Hleb aren't playing. On top of losing Flamini which meant Fab was shouldered with more defensive duties and he himself wasn't playing for ~3 months of the season, on top of the two Adebayor was injured.

JPA

I wonder will his potential bans run concurrently.
Although I can see a ban for the stamp and a fine and a warning about his future behaviour for the celebration.

The Muppet

Headshot wrote: »

I think thursday


violent conduct for the stamp and improper conduct for the celebration

Lifetime ban, I'd say.

Mr Alan

When is Van Persie's hearing for incitement?

Mitch Connor

From the arsenal fans I talk to (few sitting beside me in work, my brother and a number of his mates) it wasn't the fact Adebayor didn't score as much that annoyed them. Not scoring as much is understandable for the reasons stated. They were angered by the lack of effort he seemed to put in - they said he was simply too lazy last season and that is what annoyed them.

jaykay74

The Muppet wrote: »

Lifetime ban, I'd say.

pffft, Death by angry mob I'd say.

JPA wrote: »

I wonder will his potential bans run concurrently.
Although I can see a ban for the stamp and a fine and a warning about his future behaviour for the celebration.

Never heard of concurrent bans in football but open to correction.

L'prof

Mitch Connor wrote: »

From the arsenal fans I talk to (few sitting beside me in work, my brother and a number of his mates) it wasn't the fact Adebayor didn't score as much that annoyed them. Not scoring as much is understandable for the reasons stated. They were angered by the lack of effort he seemed to put in - they said he was simply too lazy last season and that is what annoyed them.

Poor effort & attitude after trying to force his way out of the club is my main reason for disliking him anyway!

Frisbee

Mitch Connor wrote: »

From the arsenal fans I talk to (few sitting beside me in work, my brother and a number of his mates) it wasn't the fact Adebayor didn't score as much that annoyed them. Not scoring as much is understandable for the reasons stated. They were angered by the lack of effort he seemed to put in - they said he was simply too lazy last season and that is what annoyed them.

I also find this arguement rather funny. Yes he could be lazy at times, BUT, the amount of times he was picking the ball up out on the wing last year was ridiculous, he wasn;t getting any ball up top and was putting in serious effort to get on the ball and make something happen.

And the first leg of the CL Quarter Final against Villareal last year. He was played up fornt on his own all game chasing hopeful punts, which he did admirably, constantly putting the defense under pressure, then capped it off with a wonder goal, a solo effort that took the pressure of for the home leg as we had our away goal.

Yes he could be lazy, most players have games were they don't seem interested.

But I'd much rather have him 'being lazy' at Arsenal than City this year...

The Muppet

Mr Alan wrote: »

When is Van Persie's hearing for incitement?

Thursday January 28th 2010.






(2 days before they next play united)

SlickRic

jaykay74 wrote: »

pffft, Death by angry mob I'd say.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIaORknS1Dk

thorbarry

Mitch Connor wrote: »

From the arsenal fans I talk to (few sitting beside me in work, my brother and a number of his mates) it wasn't the fact Adebayor didn't score as much that annoyed them. Not scoring as much is understandable for the reasons stated. They were angered by the lack of effort he seemed to put in - they said he was simply too lazy last season and that is what annoyed them.

not to mention the transfer shenanigans of last summer, then saying that he wasn't aware of anything all summer because he was on holiday and had his phone turned off!

LuckyLloyd

Gangsta wrote: »

Must say i have a new found respect for Bellamy.

Seriously, read up a bit about Craig Bellamy and his behaviour off the field. He's a very impressive person.

Lemlin

Mr Alan wrote: »

Not sure where you're getting those stats?

I was talking about the league. Torres had 20 starts & 4 sub appearances and got 14 goals, thats sensational by anyone standards, incl. his own.

Thing about Torres, even when he is not playing well, very often he still scores-take this year for example, he has been pretty awful so far, yet still has 3 goals in 5 games.

Adebayour sulked last year, there ain't much doubt about that.

*mitch, take minutes, or appearances, the stats are deadly, end of discussion :cool:

Torres played nine matches in Europe though and only got 2 goals. I don't think Europe can be discounted for a top striker.

Adeyabor last year - 10 goals in 27 games, as well as 7 assists in the PL. 6 goals in nine games in Europe. Hardly terrible statistics.

Headshot

FA statement regarding Emmanuel Adebayor.
The Football Association today issued two charges against Manchester City’s Emmanuel Adebayor following Saturday’s Premier League fixture between Manchester City and Arsenal.

Under the fast-track disciplinary process, Adebayor has been charged with violent conduct following an incident with Robin van Persie, which resulted in the Arsenal player receiving facial injuries.

Referee Mark Clattenburg has advised The FA that he did not see this incident, but has confirmed that had he done so, he would have sent Adebayor off for violent conduct. The player has until 6pm on Wednesday evening to respond to the charge.

Adebayor has also been charged with improper conduct following his actions when turning and running the full length of the pitch to celebrate in front of the Arsenal supporters after scoring.

The Greater Manchester Police have written to The FA with their views on this incident. A separate date will now be arranged for a commission to consider Adebayor’s goal celebration.

We have also asked the GMP and the clubs to identify those supporters involved in any violent and aggravating behaviour. The FA would like to see anyone found guilty of such behaviour face action through the legal system and banning orders from football.

The FA would like to thank the Manchester City FC stewards for the way they managed a very difficult situation and to pass on sincere best wishes to the steward who was injured during the game.

We will continue to work with the LMA and PFA in particular to help remind players of their responsibilities, especially in highly charged situations.

..

SlickRic

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Seriously, read up a bit about Craig Bellamy and his behaviour off the field. He's a very impressive person.

only educated myself recently on it myself.

just shows you eh??

book, cover and all that.

Guy:Incognito

MagicMarker wrote: »

I think a 4 match ban is fine for the stamp, he was already booked for his celebration and he apologized for it so that should be that.

I dont see why an appology should matter towards a punishment.

An appology for doing something stupid and/or incitefull would beexpected one way or another. It certainly shouldnt get you off punishment.

The stamp was a cowardly act and shoul carry a hefty ban. Players havign a row and throwign a couple of digs is a row and at least its a level playng field but stamping on someones head when they are on the ground is about as cowardly as it gets.

The Muppet

The FA would like to see anyone found guilty of such behaviour face action through the legal system and banning orders from football.

See, lifetime ban.

Xavi6

Headshot wrote: »

Adebayor has been charged twice

for the stamp and celebration

souce ssn


delighted

Course you are. Vidic and Rio are off the hook for Sunday now.

The Muppet

He'll get a minimun 3 match ban for the stamp, with the police involved the FA will have to be seen to take their complaint seriously, he will face severe punishment for the celebration too. A fine and ban I would guess.

Xavi6

As a wise man once said -

I'm the first to say that it doesn't look like a penalty but it's another thing to say that he went down with intent. I wish good luck in proving that having seen the pictures again.

So basically it would need to be proven that the intent was there in order for the charge to stand.

Cheers Arsene

Vampireskiss

Headshot wrote: »

..

Nice one. United are the only winners here

SlickRic

Xavi6 wrote: »

As a wise man once said -
So basically it would need to be proven that the intent was there in order for the charge to stand.

which means Ade is definitely screwed.

Mr Alan

personally i think its impossible to prove he meant it. stamps like that happen alot (granted not to the face) incl by some high profile players, be interesting to see if this is a new approach they are taking with them, presuming they are not accidental & punishing the players retrospectively.

Xavi6

SlickRic wrote: »

which means Ade is definitely screwed.

Not really. The referee was 5 yards away and waved play on. Clearly he didn't see any intent otherwise he would have sent the player off. I'd say that's what City will argue anyway.

And on that, if Adebayor is charged and banned for tackle does Clattenburg get a demotion for missing such a clearcut incident despite being right on the spot?

jaykay74

Xavi6 wrote: »

Not really. The referee was 5 yards away and waved play on. Clearly he didn't see any intent otherwise he would have sent the player off. I'd say that's what City will argue anyway.

And on that, if Adebayor is charged and banned for tackle does Clattenburg get a demotion for missing such a clearcut incident despite being right on the spot?

The ref has said he didn't see it and he would have given a straight red if he did. Unless City want to claim the ref is lying when he says this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_prem/8252803.stm

Referee Mark Clattenburg advised the FA that he did not see the incident, but confirmed that, had he done so, he would have sent Adebayor off for violent conduct.

Mr Alan

there is quite damning evidence of the ref seeing it quite clearly & taking no action.

event

well i dont think its a new approach, he stamped down on a player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqTy44i7HL4

to say there is no intent, IMO, is ludicrous.

the celebration, meh.
happens all the time get over it

regarding the ref, he may have seen the incident and didnt realise there was a stamp.
he might have thought it was a coming together and waved play on.
when he saw it again afterwards, he realised what happened and admitted he would have sent him off

saying the ref mght get demoted, i highly doubt it.
do they demote refs not when they make one mistake?

jaykay74

Mr Alan wrote: »

there is quite damning evidence of the ref seeing it quite clearly & taking no action.

You can see his eyes from the back of his head

Xavi6

Mr Alan wrote: »

there is quite damning evidence of the ref seeing it quite clearly & taking no action.

Indeed there is -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KcrG_n8CDI

The liar

jaykay74 wrote: »

You can see his eyes from the back of his head

Well if he didn't see it then his peripheral vision is too shit for him to be a 'top' referee.

Mr Alan

remind me the action that the PL took when Bosingwa put his studs into Benayouns back last season?

Mitch Connor

Xavi6 wrote: »

Not really. The referee was 5 yards away and waved play on. Clearly he didn't see any intent otherwise he would have sent the player off. I'd say that's what City will argue anyway.

And on that, if Adebayor is charged and banned for tackle does Clattenburg get a demotion for missing such a clearcut incident despite being right on the spot?

Or maybe the ref simply didn't see the stamp. it was a clear head injury (regardless of intent) so the fact the ref didn't stop the game (as the laws dictate) would indicate that he didn't notice the incident at all.

Also, it is likely that the charge is being brought up, in part, due to the ref having seen it again, as he would have, and noting in his report that he would have given a red card had he seen it - as many a ref has said this week.

Adebayor stamped on him, to say other wise is disgusting.

Mitch Connor

Xavi6 wrote: »

Indeed there is -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KcrG_n8CDI

The liar



Well if he didn't see it then his peripheral vision is too shit for him to be a 'top' referee.

lol.

Xavi6

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Adebayor stamped on him, to say other wise is disgusting.

Indeed it is, but lawyers defend rapists and murderers every day of the week. I imagine the sheikhs will bring the top brass in to work on this one and they will be ruthless enough not to care about the morals of the case.

Mitch Connor

Even if the ref did see it, and took no action, that doesn't make it the correct decision and the FA are well within their rights to review the incident themselves and hand out an appropriate punishment - the rules were changed in the summer, giving the FA more scope to act.

Mitch Connor

Xavi6 wrote: »

Indeed it is, but lawyers defend rapists and murderers every day of the week. I imagine the sheikhs will bring the top brass in to work on this one and they will be ruthless enough not to care about the morals of the case.

Then it is not only Adebayor acting in a disgusting manner, it will be your entire club acting in a disgusting manner.

I know if Rooney did that, I would be ashamed if United tried to appeal it.

Mr Alan

Pretty sure i remember Rooney stamping on people numerous times Mitch.

Xavi6

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Even if the ref did see it, and took no action, that doesn't make it the correct decision and the FA are well within their rights to review the incident themselves and hand out an appropriate punishment - the rules were changed in the summer, giving the FA more scope to act.

Exactly, which was my point about Clattenburg being demoted. The likes of Uriah Rennie and Rob Styles have been sent to the Championship for missing key incidents.

He was 5 yards from a stamping incident and didn't see it. Come on now, it's a pretty obvious thing to happen even if it's only out of the corner of your eye, especially when the lad who was stamped on is in a heap on the ground.

All I'm saying is Clattenburg is taking the piss by saying he saw nothing.

Mitch Connor

Mr Alan wrote: »

Pretty sure i remember Rooney stamping on people numerous times Mitch.

And? Do you have a point to go with that?

Show me the reports of Rooney being banned for clear stamping, and United appealing it.

Otherwise, jog on.

Xavi6

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Then it is not only Adebayor acting in a disgusting manner, it will be your entire club acting in a disgusting manner.

I know if Rooney did that, I would be ashamed if United tried to appeal it.

The difference is though United never get pulled for similar incidents, i.e. Ronaldo v Stoke. It hasn't got to the stage where a player has been charged and the lawyers were needed.

If it did then I've no doubt they'd do the same, as would any club.

Mitch Connor

Xavi6 wrote: »

The difference is though United never get pulled for similar incidents, i.e. Ronaldo v Stoke. It hasn't got to the stage where a player has been charged and the lawyers were needed.

If I did then I've no doubt they'd do the same, as would any club.

ah similar incidents.

A petulant flick at some is similar to almost blinding some by stamping on their face.

Mr Alan

1:where the **** are you coming to the conclusion he almost blinded Van Persie? seriously, wtf?!

2:"stamping on his face" doesn't really describe wat happened. Wasn't quite as dramatic as that.

Xavi6

Mitch Connor wrote: »

ah similar incidents.

A petulant flick at some is similar to almost blinding some by stamping on their face.

It's still something that could be charged in retrospect.

I just don't believe you would object if the shoe was on the other foot and United were trying to get one of their stars off.

jaykay74

Xavi6 wrote: »

All I'm saying is Clattenburg is taking the piss by saying he saw nothing.

Surely that doesn't affect Ades case in any way though. Thats for the demote Clattenburg case.

If he saw it and fcked up then what or if he missed it then what ? No difference for the handling of the Ade case.

Joeyjoejoe43

That stamp by Ade was an absolute disgrace, and his antics in general, he was seen just before kick off in the Arsenal half taunting his ex teammates, he had a bit of a scuffle with Eboue before the game, he stamped on VP's face and then runs 90 yards and could well have caused someone to get crushed. He's a disgrace. 6 match ban minimum in my opinion. Mr Alan, open your eyes mate, Ade was seriously out of order, really cant see how you cant see that. VP deserved a yellow for late tackle, but come on a stamp on the face, is that a good influence for young fellas watching our sport?

Xavi6

jaykay74 wrote: »

Surely that doesn't affect Ades case in any way though. Thats for the demote Clattenburg case.

If he saw it and fcked up then what or if he missed it then what ? No difference for the handling of the Ade case.

It does though. If Clattenburg said he saw it then the fact that he did nothing would be a serious case for the defence.

Mitch Connor

Mr Alan wrote: »

1:where the **** are you coming to the conclusion he almost blinded Van Persie? seriously, wtf?!

2:"stamping on his face" doesn't really describe wat happened. Wasn't quite as dramatic as that.

He came close to his eyes, with his studs. Could have blinded him. an inch or so difference and there could have been serious problems.

event

Mr Alan wrote: »

remind me the action that the PL took when Bosingwa put his studs into Benayouns back last season?

none, because the referee admitted he saw the stamp and for some reason thought it was ok. so no action can be taken, a stupid rule

its rather simple lads:

adebayor stamps on RVP. ref sees the clash, but doesnt see the stamping incident.
ref looks at the game afterwards, realises what happened and recommended he would have sent off a player.
player will get a 3 match ban.

city fans should be glad that it wasnt noticed in game, as he would have been sent off and it would have left them with 10 men, could have changed the game massively