Mourinho charged by the FA

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
District Line

District Line

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
Apr 21, 2011
13,366
969
113
London
Still not seen what happened so can't say much but not surprised that Northern mob have taken action.

At least puts to bed the conspiracy that Matth and some Spurs fans have about Jose being loved by the media and authorities. Total myth.

He has until 6pm on the 24th to respond so it'll probably be a fine and touchline ban of some sort. Bit annoying as City and Arsenal are our next two domestic games.
 
As far as I'm concerned what he did was just about what Saffa did in almost every game he managed! Saffa never got called to order though, Why Jose???
 
bluemoon2 said:
As far as I'm concerned what he did was just about what Saffa did in almost every game he managed! Saffa never got called to order though, Why Jose???
Click to expand...

One exchanges texts/signs autographs/takes pictures with referees and senior members of the FA and the other doesn't. Easy to work out which is which.
 
it's a disgrace... it's a ****ing disgrace!!

:D

diddnt realise he will sit out of the arse and city games, good news on the surface but could go the other way and galvanize the troops, wouldn't be the 1st time he pulled a trick like that, plus If you don't get the desired results he can claim he wasn't responsible. :D
 
2games is steep,it's not like he poked someones eye out ffs.
 
This has happened before. Remember when he went to go and sit with the fans or what I believe was a match against Newcastle. (I'm not that sure on this). He's just as clever but more subtle this time around.
 
He seems to have lost it on this occasion:
"But if, in this moment, Fifa says that it's a foul, it's a foul. But I think Samuel did well. Maybe the referee did wrong; I don't know, to be fair. But in my opinion, that should be allowed as it was for years. No contact with the goalkeeper, nothing to stop the goalkeeper to make a quick kick … even with space he took 30 seconds. The goalkeeper has six seconds to have the ball, correct? They had almost half a minute. That's breaking the rules. So Samuel didn't break the rules"

Many contradictions and absurdities here.
 
PowerSpurs said:
He seems to have lost it on this occasion:
"But if, in this moment, Fifa says that it's a foul, it's a foul. But I think Samuel did well. Maybe the referee did wrong; I don't know, to be fair. But in my opinion, that should be allowed as it was for years. No contact with the goalkeeper, nothing to stop the goalkeeper to make a quick kick … even with space he took 30 seconds. The goalkeeper has six seconds to have the ball, correct? They had almost half a minute. That's breaking the rules. So Samuel didn't break the rules"

Many contradictions and absurdities here.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone really knows the legality of that particular situation. Remember Henry doing whilst the keeper was going to kick straight from hand? That goal stood and the rules were subsequently changed after that I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back