Retrospective bans

Here is the place to talk about all things city and football!

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby carl_feedthegoat » Mon Mar 06, 2017 12:34 pm

Original Dub wrote:
Im_Spartacus wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:Seems Wiggy seen exactly what happened, when many say he couldn't have as he was facing the other way.

Sky Story



Bein sports absolutely nailed Rooney over this, ran the incident over and over pointing out he was a lying cunt, even Phil Neville couldnt defend what he said vs what he claimed to have seen when it was so obviously an pre-meditated attempt to lie designed to deflect the criticism from Ibrahimovic.

I assume Sky didn't labour this point as it wouldn't have been the party line


That had "propaganda machine" written all over it. Wheeling the fat cunt out so he could divert attention away from the elbow was bad enough, but blatantly lying to say that he saw it and it was "very bad" is something else altogether.

What a horrible club that lot are.



Never ever trust a scouser.


Image
THEY SAY SWEARING IS DUE TO A LIMITED VOCABULARY. I KNOW THOUSANDS OF WORDS, BUT I STILL PREFER "FUCK OFF" TO "GO AWAY"
carl_feedthegoat
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 32251
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 2:51 am
Supporter of: Man City

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Hazy2 » Mon Mar 06, 2017 12:34 pm

Mikhail Chigorin wrote:
Original Dub wrote:
Im_Spartacus wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:Seems Wiggy seen exactly what happened, when many say he couldn't have as he was facing the other way.

Sky Story



Bein sports absolutely nailed Rooney over this, ran the incident over and over pointing out he was a lying cunt, even Phil Neville couldnt defend what he said vs what he claimed to have seen when it was so obviously an pre-meditated attempt to lie designed to deflect the criticism from Ibrahimovic.

I assume Sky didn't labour this point as it wouldn't have been the party line


That had "propaganda machine" written all over it. Wheeling the fat cunt out so he could divert attention away from the elbow was bad enough, but blatantly lying to say that he saw it and it was "very bad" is something else altogether.

What a horrible club that lot are.


Could Shrek's untruths be construed as bringing the game into disrepute ??

Did the FA ought to be scrutinising this as well - rhetorical question, just as we know what the outcome would be if it were even looked into ??


The toys will be out from Maureen no Zorba no CL. RED TWATS !
Hazy2
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9693
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 11:34 am
Supporter of: MCFC
My favourite player is: Silva

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Beefymcfc » Mon Mar 06, 2017 1:28 pm

Has he been charged yet?
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".

The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
User avatar
Beefymcfc
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 46711
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
Supporter of: The Mighty Blues

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Beefymcfc » Mon Mar 06, 2017 1:28 pm

What about now?
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".

The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
User avatar
Beefymcfc
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 46711
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
Supporter of: The Mighty Blues

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Justified logic » Mon Mar 06, 2017 1:33 pm

A nation holds its breath...
Justified logic
Rosler's Grandad Bombed The Swamp
 
Posts: 3559
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:40 pm
Location: Playing in the hole
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: David Silva

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Justified logic » Mon Mar 06, 2017 2:10 pm

Watch on youtube.com


So, Ibrahimovic grabs hold of Mings and hurls him to the ground. Is this part of football? Is it not a red card all day long?????????

Then Ibrahimovic stamps on Mings' hip as he strides him but falls over. Mings gets up and, seeing the mess of Rooney and Ibrahimovic on the ground, leaps over but catches Rooney's side with his right knee, disturbing his stride, and he lands on Ibrahimovic, who is trying to head butt his foot.

Finally Ibrahimovic decides to challenge for a header with one hand open and one clenched in a fist. Unfortunate for him, as the fist is on the end of the arm that elbows Mings.

Cases proven. Three red-cardable offences by Ibrahimovic, unfortunate contact by Mings.
Justified logic
Rosler's Grandad Bombed The Swamp
 
Posts: 3559
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:40 pm
Location: Playing in the hole
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: David Silva

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Nigels Tackle » Mon Mar 06, 2017 2:59 pm

ARMCHAIR FAN
Nigels Tackle
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Allison's Big Fat Cigar
 
Posts: 18656
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 7:57 pm
Location: here, there, every fucking where
Supporter of: man love
My favourite player is: riyad meh!rez

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby CTID Hants » Mon Mar 06, 2017 3:01 pm

Beefymcfc wrote:Has he been charged yet?


Yes, they both have.........

Manchester United's Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Bournemouth defender Tyrone Mings have been charged with violent conduct by the Football Association.

The pair clashed during the 1-1 draw between their sides on Saturday when Mings, 23, landed on the United forward's head with his studs.

Moments later, Ibrahimovic caught Mings in the face with his elbow at a corner.

Both the players have until 18:00 GMT on Tuesday to reply to the charge.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39182905
Born A Blue

Image
User avatar
CTID Hants
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Kaptain Kompany's Komposure
 
Posts: 14780
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:33 pm
Location: Farnborough, Hampshire

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby patrickblue » Mon Mar 06, 2017 3:36 pm

You missed this bit.

However, Mings could face an increased ban for his offence.

The FA statement added: "Furthermore, the FA has submitted a claim that the standard punishment that would otherwise apply for the misconduct committed by the Bournemouth defender is 'clearly insufficient'."

So they'll probably say it's all Ming's fault and give him a three match ban, plus beakers three, so that manure aren't penalised and can maintain the million game unbeaten run.
[img]https://giphy.com/gifs/3o7qDYcso3azifQVyg/html5[/img]
User avatar
patrickblue
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Shaun Goater's 103 Goals
 
Posts: 7443
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:49 pm
Location: Newbury Berks
Supporter of: City
My favourite player is: The one and only Goat

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Mikhail Chigorin » Mon Mar 06, 2017 3:43 pm

patrickblue wrote:You missed this bit.

However, Mings could face an increased ban for his offence.

The FA statement added: "Furthermore, the FA has submitted a claim that the standard punishment that would otherwise apply for the misconduct committed by the Bournemouth defender is 'clearly insufficient'."

So they'll probably say it's all Ming's fault and give him a three match ban, plus beakers three, so that manure aren't penalised and can maintain the million game unbeaten run.


You're right PB; there's no way that this is going to happen.

The FA will find some spurious way to exonerate Cirano, lumping it all on Mings at the same time and then English football can return to 'normal' again.
Mikhail Chigorin
Shaun Goater's 103 Goals
 
Posts: 7933
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:37 pm
Location: Lost in the variations of the King's Gambit
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: Bert Trautmann

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby zabbadabbado » Mon Mar 06, 2017 4:51 pm

Imabignosedbitch deserves a 6 game ban.

Gill will see he gets the minimum of 3.That you can put your mortgage on.
zabbadabbado
De Jong's Tackle
 
Posts: 1887
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 4:42 pm
Supporter of: man city
My favourite player is: KDB

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Beefymcfc » Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:18 pm

patrickblue wrote:You missed this bit.

However, Mings could face an increased ban for his offence.

The FA statement added: "Furthermore, the FA has submitted a claim that the standard punishment that would otherwise apply for the misconduct committed by the Bournemouth defender is 'clearly insufficient'."

So they'll probably say it's all Ming's fault and give him a three match ban, plus beakers three, so that manure aren't penalised and can maintain the million game unbeaten run.

How fucking ridiculous is that! For me it looked innocuous and even if he did try, there's no way they could prove intent; surely?

Oh, I forgot, Sky allowed Wiggy and StinkingBitch extra time in front of the camera to plead his innocence and put Ming's in the frame, even though neither of the cunts could see it. Then, of course, the media shit storm forcing the issue and trying to exonerate the big nosed cunt.

If things were honest in our game, Beeker would have been cited on 3 occasions and Wiggy done for bringing the game into disrepute, lying his arse off in front of millions. Ming's shouldn't be 'Getting extra on top', he should be applauded for not actually stamping on his head, cos the cunt deserved one.
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".

The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
User avatar
Beefymcfc
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 46711
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
Supporter of: The Mighty Blues

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Mase » Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:42 pm

How could they say Ming's "tried" to stamp on his head?! His head was just lay there. Ready for a nice juicy stamp. If Ming's wanted to he could have caused even more brain damage to the big nosed nonce than he's already got!
Mase
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 44318
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:08 pm
Location: The North Pole.
Supporter of: Warnock's Ref Rants
My favourite player is: Danny Tiatto

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Beefymcfc » Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:48 pm

Mase wrote:How could they say Ming's "tried" to stamp on his head?! His head was just lay there. Ready for a nice juicy stamp. If Ming's wanted to he could have caused even more brain damage to the big nosed nonce than he's already got!

The deflection tactics are working with everybody talking about Mings rather than the real issue which is Beeker putting it about again.

Wouldn't surprise me to hear that Beeker gets a 3 match retrospective wild card, to be produced the next time he 'accidentally' elbows, stamps or throws another player to the floor.
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".

The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
User avatar
Beefymcfc
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 46711
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
Supporter of: The Mighty Blues

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby nottsblue » Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:20 pm

Zlatan has accepted the three match ban
nottsblue
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 32476
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 5:17 pm
Location: Nottingham
Supporter of: manchester city
My favourite player is: niall Quinn & Kun

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Plain Speaking » Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:51 pm

FA have deliberately chosen to ignore Ibra's stamp on Ming's. Prior to Ming's catching Ibra.

There has been no publicity of this post match.

Ibra should have had a 6 match ban even ignoring Ibra throwing Ming's to the floor.
Plain Speaking
Richard Dunne's Own Goals
 
Posts: 936
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:54 pm
Supporter of: Man City
My favourite player is: Silva

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Justified logic » Tue Mar 07, 2017 5:39 pm

Plain Speaking wrote:FA have deliberately chosen to ignore Ibra's stamp on Ming's. Prior to Ming's catching Ibra.

There has been no publicity of this post match.

Ibra should have had a 6 match ban even ignoring Ibra throwing Ming's to the floor.

Mings and Bournemouth have appealed. Pretty sure they'll mention the deliberate stamp on him and the fact that his right leg caught Rooney's right side as he was straddling Rooney and Ibrahimovic and that the resulting deflection of his stride to the left caused him to land closer to Ibrahimovic than he'd intended.

But why has Ibrahimovic's hurling of Mings to the ground been totally ignored? Surman got a yellow for tapping Ibrahimovic on the chest. Isn't picking someone up and hurling him to the ground worthy of a red? Given that, the stamp, the elbow and that he got a yellow anyway for mouthing, Ibrahimovic's ban should be much longer than 3 games.
Justified logic
Rosler's Grandad Bombed The Swamp
 
Posts: 3559
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:40 pm
Location: Playing in the hole
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: David Silva

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Original Dub » Tue Mar 07, 2017 5:42 pm

Fernandinho got a three match ban for pushing a player who decided to throw himself over.

Nothing mentioned for ibra thowing the player to the ground.

But there's video evidence, how does it get brushed away?
Original Dub
 

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Saul Goodman » Tue Mar 07, 2017 6:24 pm

Saul Goodman wrote:Both will be banned. Mings longer than Zlatan. Dont worry. Itll be okay

Just like i expected. Club and player bias aside, the FA got this spot on
User avatar
Saul Goodman
Joe Hart's 29 Clean Sheets
 
Posts: 5412
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 5:18 am
Location: Toronto
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: Bernardo Silva

Re: Retrospective bans

Postby Hazy2 » Tue Mar 07, 2017 6:47 pm

Saul Goodman wrote:
Saul Goodman wrote:Both will be banned. Mings longer than Zlatan. Dont worry. Itll be okay

Just like i expected. Club and player bias aside, the FA got this spot on


If it was Joey 10 games after they trolled through the 90 mins.
Hazy2
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9693
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 11:34 am
Supporter of: MCFC
My favourite player is: Silva

PreviousNext

Return to The Maine Football forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], salford city and 133 guests