He got injured in the game. Probably will be back for our game tho.
Premier League Thread
- Thread starter saintlyhero
- Start date
-
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
-
- Status
There are rumours that Arsenal are going in for Cavani at 62m. If this happens it sums Wenger up 100%. Will pay over the odds for an attacking player but will not stump up the cash for defensive ones - if Khedira and Schneiderlin rumours are to be believed
Matt Le Tiss says it how it is. Jeff Stelling just asked him how Gary Cahill and Raheem Sterling have not been charged by the FA for their incidents this week. Matt said that maybe it is because they are full England internationals and the FA don't want to punish their own. He even brought up the old Alan Shearer kicking Neil Lennon case.
Spot on Matt.
It is a disgrace.
Spot on Matt.
It is a disgrace.
Sorry Le Tiss, but you're spouting bollocks. Sterling wasn't charged because it happened right in front of the assistant who didn't take action at the time.
That shouldn't matter though - if the referee misses an obvious foul, then the FA should be able to deal with it retrospectively.
You've missed the point Tom... Pretty much like a ref often does. He also said that it is garbage the cop out of saying the ref saw it.
The key point here is that two players took actions in a pitch that should have been punished.
So no, Le Tiss is spot on.
They can only take action in these cases if it's something extreme. Not a pathetic little slap.
I'll add that it also then shows how **** the officials have become Tom. Hiding behind some bollocks technicality
That Tom is now you spouting bollocks. A pathetic slap is a slap. Not allowed on a pitch, or as a referee are you now saying the laws of the game can be subject to varying interpretation?
He's spouting bollocks by suggesting that they got away with it because they are England Internationals. The FA are following their own rules, regardless if they're right or wrong.
Did you see it ear what he said it just reading my words?
He is standing back from the rule book and saying, "This isn't right". He is right with that view.
No what I'm saying is that the FA are following the guidelines they set. Now, I don't agree with them but that's a different matter.
Did you see what he said? You have focused on the rules. He is saying that those players should not be able to get away with that. He is right.
So if a non English international kicked another player in the back, would the FA punish the player?
In my opinion without a shadow of doubt.
In my opinion without a shadow of doubt.
Yes, I agree with that, but by what you said, he suggested there is some kind of favouritism towards England players which is rubbish.
He also said that the referee had to see the Shelvey incident in the same game, as well as the Sterling one.
He asked when the ref gets to say what he saw or didn't and who knows what is said. He has a point.
Take Cahill. If the ref says he saw it and took no action then the FA presumably will tell him he's blind and not let him ref s game for a few weeks. Same with the Lino for the Sterling incident. Either way you cut it, the FA have condoned what happened.
He asked when the ref gets to say what he saw or didn't and who knows what is said. He has a point.
Take Cahill. If the ref says he saw it and took no action then the FA presumably will tell him he's blind and not let him ref s game for a few weeks. Same with the Lino for the Sterling incident. Either way you cut it, the FA have condoned what happened.
I've not seen what Le Tiss has said, but I would say that Tom is correct here but it's just that things have been lost in translation (so to speak).
The decision not to charge Sterling is 100% correct, as per FA rules (or actually, it might even be UEFA/FIFA rules, I'm not 100% sure). Nothing to do with Sterling's nationality. The linesman saw it, and he choose not to do anything. Book closed.
The FA rule which say 'book closed' though is what is wrong - together with the linesman, who failed in his job. When an official sees an incident and doesn't punish it correctly, it should be possible to retrospectively punish it correctly. It is stupid that they can't. Only in extreme circumstances can such a decision be retrospectively dealt with differently. SF4L is exactly right to say that it shouldn't matter and that they should have the power. But right now, they don't.
But yes, based on the framework to go by, it was correct not to charge Sterling.
The decision not to charge Sterling is 100% correct, as per FA rules (or actually, it might even be UEFA/FIFA rules, I'm not 100% sure). Nothing to do with Sterling's nationality. The linesman saw it, and he choose not to do anything. Book closed.
The FA rule which say 'book closed' though is what is wrong - together with the linesman, who failed in his job. When an official sees an incident and doesn't punish it correctly, it should be possible to retrospectively punish it correctly. It is stupid that they can't. Only in extreme circumstances can such a decision be retrospectively dealt with differently. SF4L is exactly right to say that it shouldn't matter and that they should have the power. But right now, they don't.
But yes, based on the framework to go by, it was correct not to charge Sterling.
- Status