In other news, did you see James Perch's tackle on their forward's knee later on that game? Same thing, yellow carded... Can't say as I blame Perch, though.
Agree with that. Just think there is a bit of a witch hunt on McManaman at the minute which isn't fair IMO. He didn't mean to injure anyone and he's getting crucified! The FA are an shambles!
and blew his knee out, ended his season, and possibly ruined his career. If it is in the book reckless is red, then it is case closed. I think Coloccini and Shlevey off the top of my head got reds for similar but a lot less dangerous tackles. Gotta be consistent!
I don't want it both ways to be fair. If Suarez had done that I wouldn't have complained had he got red or a ban after the game.
**** Mcmanaman, **** him big time, he barely had one foot on turf, in fact he had a toe on the turf when he went in studs out for what, the merest touches of the ball allows you to follow through like that, following through when the other player hasn't even raised a leg to tackle, cowardly ****ing bastard all day, hope he gets same I really do.. Folllowing through is a foul ball touched or not so?? FA are useless corrupt ****s I feel for the Newcastle player, Macca is getting what he deserves for such a chicken**** tackle. I didn't hear, lets get off Lucas Neil's back after Carra. I have played and if I ever caught a player like that i'd go straight to him and be waving on the physios immediately, McManaman is a **** It's all very well and good till it happens to you then it's different. Re Suarez, if it brought to the FA and he is guilty then OK
Could be that this is plural because it wasn't taken care retrospectively? But again with this I would want consistency, Huth Stamp on Suarez,etc.
I'm going to get a lot of flak for this but I do agree with the "no retrospective punishment if it's been seen" rule. We can't open Pandora's box and allow for backtracking and re-assessing match incidents. Referee's MUST have some sort of authority, and this rule protects that. Who gives a **** about flying into 50-50 tackles if your club can just ask for a post-match review and get it overturned on a technicality? I hate the FA and they're absolutely corrupt ****s, but this rule serves so that the influence of the referee isn't undermined on the pitch, which is absolutely necessary to keep games clean and prevent chaos. I've played football before and in my local league, if the ref didn't have ultimate authority, no one would respect him. Most didn't anyway. So it doesn't matter what FIFA says, in this extremely rare case, the FA are right to have this rule in place. Now, the real issue is that the referee's in this league are absolutely idiotic and haven't got a clue about football. Had the referee given a red card and known to do so, none of this would have mattered. There would be no media uproar and the rule would not have had to be followed. But since we apparently have some sort of referee clique () mistakes are never punished unless you damage one of the big teams. Simple way to fix this. Replace the **** refs with ones that are young and upcoming, until you get a league of alright ones who make mistakes rarely, not one or two a game as is normal nowadays. This leads to less controversial calls, less controversy, less need for media to get involved, appropriate punishments for the guilty parties, and that's that. However, THIS is where the FA is corrupt. This doesn't appeal to them - fair play would lead to less money for big teams. McManaman got very lucky and escaped punishment when he shouldn't have, but he shouldn't be crucified (he's young and probably feels terrible about it). The FA shouldn't be crucified because of their rule. Although it may seem unfair in these incidents, it does more good than harm. The FA should be crucified because they won't take any action to prevent this from happening again. The referee should be punished for not upholding the laws of the game.
Its plural because he's done it more than once I thought about the Huth stamp but the question wouldn't have had the same effect. Everyone thinks he's a ****
When discussing goal line technology or when a offsides been called wrong, I have said there are too many cameras at games. I think it applies here too. You can't tell me that these issues we see nowadays didn't happen in the past. Its down to the media coverage. Lets go back to two or three cameras and one replay. One pundit on MOTD too who is only there to introduce the games #jimmyhillstyle
For me, it's part of the game. As much as I'll moan and be aggrieved if something like that happens to us, it would be worse if it never happened at all. Soon goal line technology will spread to pitch-side technology, telling the ref when the ball went out, who the last player to touch it was, etc. No more offside plays, either. Then there will be cameras which can assess speeds of players and likelihood of collision, reducing the need for referees to pay attention to fouls. And soon there will be no more mistakes in refereeing - no more controversy, no more debate, no more discussion. No more banter, no more talking points. And the game will be a shell of it's former self. Think about it. England's phantom goal not given - so much controversy about it. And that made it so much more enjoyable. The millions of enraged fans, the thousands of conversations that day, the years of ruing that missed chance to score. Those things make the game what it is today. So I'm not happy to see a perfect game, with no mistakes. It won't be as fun to discuss anymore. "Did you see that pass?" "Yes. Did you see that foul?" "Yes." "That goal was good, right?" "Yes." Educate the referee's to make sure it doesn't happen often. But the rare mistake is a part of the game.
Couldn't agree more but having less coverage wouldn't stop that I don't want technology but its looks like we're getting it...
I think he was lucky to get away with the Distin one yeah, had he been charged with that I wouldn't have complained about it, although I would have mentioned the total inconsistencies that exist. As we've seen today.
I know where you're coming from Danilo but for me the game's already been sterilised and on-field technology hasn't done that. The introduction of a hundred cameras and 24/7 media coverage certainly has played its part though but that's life. Show me a footy fan who complains there are too many games on telly or too many forums or too much in the papers etc etc. Even in the dark ages when I was a lad that tackle would have been totally unacceptable but just wouldn't have received wall to wall coverage. What would have happened however is that Mcmanaman would have had the **** kicked out of him. I agree about technology and the potential for it to ruin the game but this is an incident that bears little relation to goal line technology or offside cameras. This is about punishing players for unacceptable behaviour. Officials can (and always will miss incidents) and that's one thing but to see it and not act is pretty damn poor but for the FA to then not act is far worse. This was a leg breaking tackle seen by the whole world...except the buffoons at the FA (and the buffoon that is Dave Whelan).
I do think he should have been sent off in the game but once one of the officials saw it (and I think that's the bigger question here, what exactly did the linesman see for hi to think it wasn't a red card offence?) then nothing can be done. If you start overruling referee's decisions then when does it stop? Do you look at every tackle that went unpunished? Then do you start issuing retrospective yellow cards to players who may have got away with a tackle? McManaman obviously didn't mean it, he went in for the ball and technically did win it and just got him with the follow through which was dangerous. If the ref didn't see it then fair enough, not much you can do. If the FA stick to their rules then fair play, they need to have a rule and work to it. If the linesman saw it and thought it was a perfectly good tackle not worthy of a foul/yellow/red then he needs to be taken to one side and asked to explain his decision. If he then came back and said I saw it but didn't see it from the correct angle then the FA should be allowed to step in, show the ref/linesman and ask them to suggest what they would do if they had seen it from this angle in real time.
This is the catch 22 with technology I guess. As Danilo and yourself say "where does it end?". I realise the FA do have a tricky situation here as in do they just punish the **** tackles in televised games? What about the other **** tackles between Tranmere and Oldham for example or Scunthorpe and Yeovil etc. It's a tough one I know but the issue for me is the total inconsistency this rule throws up. We'll punish players if an incident isn't seen but we won't punish them if the ref's seen it but completely ****ed it up?? Seriously?? At the end of the day it's all very well saying the ref's could be undermined but when they are making such god damn awful decisions maybe they deserve to be undermined.
I don't think the FA avoid these situations because of how far it could go, I think they have this rule in the beleif it somehow backs up their respect the referee campaign!
no sorry but NO! thats apologising to the offender for making a stupid challenge over the top of the ball showing studs. didn't mean it and mis timed are ecuses but nobody is accusing him of being out to break a leg. simply put he deserves 3 match ban end of... the issue is the FA> I saw on MOTD an angle where MAYBE the ref was unsighted by a wigan player BUT i agree, no linesman action and ok if its missed and no retrospective action is taken its a total FA joke. the most disappointing thing is the wa nobody bit my line... HERE FISHIE FISHIES!!!
