The mancityfans.net football forum

Could someone please explain how there were just 2 minutes extra, when Kolarov was down for around 4 minutes and there were at least 4 substitutions?

I can only think that Mr Moss completely forgot about Aleks' injury.

He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

craigmcfc wrote:Could someone please explain how there were just 2 minutes extra, when Kolarov was down for around 4 minutes and there were at least 4 substitutions?

I can only think that Mr Moss completely forgot about Aleks' injury.

Can't have us improve our goal difference now, can we?

In fairness though I was fuckin freezing and when Kolarov went down, I was thinking "an extra 5 minutes injury time" please, no haha

ruralblue wrote:He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

That Cabaye pull back was down below us. Ridiculous that he didn't get a second yellow for that. Moss completely bottled it.

craigmcfc wrote:Could someone please explain how there were just 2 minutes extra, when Kolarov was down for around 4 minutes and there were at least 4 substitutions?

I can only think that Mr Moss completely forgot about Aleks' injury.

They shifted Kolarov quite quick. I remember thinking it was reasonably quick but they would prob put loads of injury time on. With the subs etc I thought it should have been 4-5 mins. The subs were quicker than usual. No one walking off from 40 yards away today

I thought that as well about the 2 minutes, it should have been more

Amazing too that on the same day there was that controversy with the 99th minute Terry goal.

The ref didn't apply the rules twice. No doubt 4 minutes minimum but also the sending off should have been nailed on but he took the decision ( some would say sensibly) to be lenient when he knew he should send him off. Will the ref assessor mark him down for that?

Re the sending off of Cabaye. Utterly irrelevant if there is twenty minutes or two minutes either on the clock or left to go. The integrity of the sport and it's officiating is at stake. Cabaye is now free to play the next game where he shouldn't have giving a Palace an unfair advantage. The totting up of yellows also is part of this. Either the laws are applied correctly or they may as well not be.

Every decision counts or no decision counts

ruralblue wrote:He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

dont be delusional.
more likely referee error than corruption. or the fact that it was 4-0; just end the match. 2 mins vs. 4 mins makes no difference.

phips wrote:

ruralblue wrote:He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

dont be delusional.
more likely referee error than corruption. or the fact that it was 4-0; just end the match. 2 mins vs. 4 mins makes no difference.

Delusional? No it doesn't matter at all does it. What if we'd scored another and that goal was the difference at the end of the season? No you're right. The title will never be decided by goal difference......

phips wrote:

ruralblue wrote:He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

dont be delusional.
more likely referee error than corruption. or the fact that it was 4-0; just end the match. 2 mins vs. 4 mins makes no difference.

It took 4 minutes for you to be conceived, dad should have pulled out at 2.

Of course it makes a difference, Palace could have scored thus taking away our clean sheet, or we could have added to our goal difference. Look at what happened with Chelsea, there wouldn't have been a chance for an equaliser if the ref had blown the whistle at 97' or when the ball was kicked out of play between 97' and 99'. Refs cannot just end a game when they feel like.

He probably saw how empty the stadium was and assumed his watch was wrong so just blew up.

craigmcfc wrote:

phips wrote:

ruralblue wrote:He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

dont be delusional.
more likely referee error than corruption. or the fact that it was 4-0; just end the match. 2 mins vs. 4 mins makes no difference.

Delusional? No it doesn't matter at all does it. What if we'd scored another and that goal was the difference at the end of the season? No you're right. The title will never be decided by goal difference......

93.20

Two minutes doesn't make any difference at all. Should have stopped the QPR game at 91.20 . You are right bit of extra time is neither her nor there is it.

Oh and fuck off you twat!

Cheers

nottsblue wrote:Re the sending off of Cabaye. Utterly irrelevant if there is twenty minutes or two minutes either on the clock or left to go. The integrity of the sport and it's officiating is at stake. Cabaye is now free to play the next game where he shouldn't have giving a Palace an unfair advantage. The totting up of yellows also is part of this. Either the laws are applied correctly or they may as well not be.

Every decision counts or no decision counts

100% this.

The rules are the rules......for most clubs.

It's another rule open to abuse. Time lost through delaying tactics never gets added on. It drives me nutz.
That's why I would love to see two halves of 30 minutes, on a stadium clock that is stopped when the ball is out of play.
We'd get clarity and more action.
Sure teams would still try and break up the flow of the game, but that time would not be lost and it would be a lot more difficult to achieve.

It's another rule open to abuse. Time lost through delaying tactics never gets added on. It drives me nutz.
That's why I would love to see two halves of 30 minutes, on a stadium clock that is stopped when the ball is out of play.
We'd get clarity and more action.
Sure teams would still try and break up the flow of the game, but that time would not be lost and it would be a lot more difficult to achieve.

Tim777 wrote:

phips wrote:

ruralblue wrote:He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

dont be delusional.
more likely referee error than corruption. or the fact that it was 4-0; just end the match. 2 mins vs. 4 mins makes no difference.

It took 4 minutes for you to be conceived, dad should have pulled out at 2

Absolutely brilliant

Original Dub wrote:

Tim777 wrote:

phips wrote:

ruralblue wrote:He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

dont be delusional.
more likely referee error than corruption. or the fact that it was 4-0; just end the match. 2 mins vs. 4 mins makes no difference.

It took 4 minutes for you to be conceived, dad should have pulled out at 2

Absolutely brilliant

Ahaha I missed that yesterday! Well played Tim777!

Tim777 wrote:

phips wrote:

ruralblue wrote:He probably realised "Hmmmm what if Cabaye goes on and scores!". It wouldn't have affected the three points but any remote chance if them getting a goal and Cabaye being involved he would have bee under mass scrutiny.

dont be delusional.
more likely referee error than corruption. or the fact that it was 4-0; just end the match. 2 mins vs. 4 mins makes no difference.

Of course it makes a difference, Palace could have scored thus taking away our clean sheet, or we could have added to our goal difference. Look at what happened with Chelsea, there wouldn't have been a chance for an equaliser if the ref had blown the whistle at 97' or when the ball was kicked out of play between 97' and 99'. Refs cannot just end a game when they feel like.

correct they should not. but to think that whoever that ref was was thinking "it should 4 but im gonna blow for 2 so City dont increase their goal differential which might rob them on the title come May" is absurd. not everything that happens in a match that doesn't go in City's favor is corruption and a campaign against the Arab owners. its fucking incompetence and/or laziness. you sound like Jose moaning about decisions.

do you wear your tin foil helmet and believe in black helicopter conspiracies?

Get rid of this cunt asap