Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [20th March - 24th March 2015]

I have never understood the rule that an incident can only be investigated if the referee didn't see it. Just because he saw it doesn't mean he saw it very well or from a good angle.
 
I think it's because they don't want to be seen to be changing referee's decisions post-match. If the ref says he hasn't seen it then he's not had the opportunity to make a decision, whereas if he's seen it and not made any decision/the correct decision I think the FA would rather leave it. I'm not saying I agree with it, but that's presumably why they do it that way.
 
nicktay2605 said:
I think it's because they don't want to be seen to be changing referee's decisions post-match. If the ref says he hasn't seen it then he's not had the opportunity to make a decision, whereas if he's seen it and not made any decision/the correct decision I think the FA would rather leave it. I'm not saying I agree with it, but that's presumably why they do it that way.
Click to expand...

Oh this is absolutely correct in my opinion.

I think the argument from clubs would be; that if player X did not deserve to be sent off, the outcome of the game could have been different.
 
Imagine if it had been Balo instead of Gerrard doing the stamp, I wonder if all the pundits would have been so... almost apologetic about it.
 
Tombstone said:
Expected it to be a ban tbh, but that's our best defender gone at a crucial time. Gerrard we can live without for 3 games but Lovren, Sakho and Can , looks like a very wobbly back line. None of them look like leaders and all of them look unsteady under pressure with the ball. Could well be top four chances gone now. I don't know, with the slip last year and the bans now this year, I swear that at times we cause ourselves to lose rather than the opposition beating us.
Click to expand...

You have a relatively easy FA Cup tie and two EPL games which he misses.

The Arsenal game Utd could easily lose (its a complete toss up at that stage of the season imo even if Arsenal rarely win at OT in the EPL) and Newcastle away - well that team is changeable / inconsistent every week anyway

I honestly don't think its as dead and buried as you think


Looking at it another way, Utd need to aim for at least another 5 wins and a draw to make it even close to staying in the top four (baring in mind the form you were in before last weekend) - admittedly this is dependant on the Arsenal result in 10 days, but saying that it wouldn't be that surprising seeing you getting a better result vs Chelsea than Utd manage either.

That means Utd wining at home to Villa and West Brom and away to Everton, Palace and Hull (on the last day of the season remember) and trying to get a point from either the City / Arsenal (at home) or Chelsea (away) games

(edit - admittedly in one sense having the City and Chelsea games back to back and so near after the int break might help Utd IF a decent result can be got from one or both games)

Admittedly the above is based on form of both Utd and Liverpool prior to last weekend rather than points total average from the last few seasons which may require less points.

(and we have quite a few similar teams left too although away/home is different - Arsenal, Hull, West Brom, Chelsea & Palace face both teams)


edit 2 - there is also potential for Chelsea to have sealed the title already by the time you two meet at the bridge several weeks after they meet us - depending on City / Arsenal's form of course - which could help decide your result there.
 
Last edited:
Tombstone said:
Expected it to be a ban tbh, but that's our best defender gone at a crucial time. Gerrard we can live without for 3 games but Lovren, Sakho and Can , looks like a very wobbly back line. None of them look like leaders and all of them look unsteady under pressure with the ball. Could well be top four chances gone now. I don't know, with the slip last year and the bans now this year, I swear that at times we cause ourselves to lose rather than the opposition beating us.
Click to expand...

Or we don't perform for the first half of the year requiring perfect form the second half which is the real issue
 
eZqHk28.png
 
Tummy said:
It was an obvious stamp and deserved ban. Similar to one of the Costa stamps (he should have had a longer ban personally), it was pretty cut and dry.
Click to expand...

Yep. It was mostly similar (though nowhere near as cut and dried) to the Costa one on Skrtel which he didn't get charged or banned for. He got banned for the less blatant one on Can in the same game. :rolleyes:

Like I said. They're a joke.

 
Last edited:
inogen said:
Yep. It was mostly similar (though nowhere near as cut and dried) to the Costa one on Skrtel which he didn't get charged or banned for. He got banned for the less blatant one on Can in the same game. :rolleyes:

Like I said. They're a joke.

Click to expand...

Are you now saying Skrtel's was a stamp then or still accidental?
 
JohnnyG said:
Are you now saying Skrtel's was a stamp then or still accidental?
Click to expand...

I don't know if it was accidental or not. I find the evidence that it was malicious spurious to say the least. I'd say if Atkinson did see it, it would have been a yellow. Much like he gave Rooney a yellow for the ankle damage he gave to Mignolet.

If Skrtel's is bonafide stamp, then how the hell isn't the Costa one? Or did Costa just get a BOGOFF deal?

The FA just make it all up as they go along. *****.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom