I'm failing to see the difference between the Thatcher/Mendes incident and this one...

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board ARCHIVE' started by Lee, Nov 25, 2008.

  1. Lee

    Lee Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,438
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Barnsley, England, United Kingdom
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    both were exceptional circumstances, both resulted in nasty injuries, both were only issued yellow cards.</p>

    I understand Man City were fully in support of any punishment given to Thatcher and Sheff Utd aren't.... but where does the diffference come? Because the Thatcher incident was on live tv and millions witnessed it? Because it was in the premier league?</p>

    Apologies if i've missed something obvious... just can't believe the FA haven't acted in any way! Nothing at all!</p>

    Respect? Get fecked right off.
    </p>
     
  2. Fra

    Fraser32 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    3,019
    Likes Received:
    249
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Hull
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Exactly! Can you imagine if Morgan had done this to Rooney, the FA wouldn't have backed down then!
     
  3. Oas

    Oasismad BFC New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Barnsley and Holyhead, i love the high brow places
    Home Page:
    Also because the FA dont want to piss Sheff Utd off anymore cos the Tevez thing!
     
  4. juttyp

    juttyp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    605
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Member of the 135 club !
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    So they won't mind when one of ours does the same to another professional

    They wouldn't want to piss off over the Hume affiar?
     
  5. t'owd man

    t'owd man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Messages:
    2,031
    Likes Received:
    1,237
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Skivvy for r lass
    Location:
    Tarn
    Style:
    XenForo - Xenith Reds
    The difference is the referee, in the Thatcher case the referee had the balls to phone the FA the day after the incident and admit that after watching a video of the incident he had come to the conclusion that the incident was worse than he initially thought, therefore opening the door for the FA to take action. The referee in our match probably doesn't have a brain let alone any balls. Still doesn't alter the fact that the FA are bunch of spineless barstewards, according to the statement from the FA on the main site they don't consider a fractured scull exceptional and the don't consider the tackle??????????? to be a deliberate act when even a blind man on a galloping horse could it was a blatent off the ball incident.
     
  6. Ori

    Original Dazza New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    853
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    That's where the FA's 'argument' falls down ...

    There is already a precedent so for all their 'new tests'of having to show deliberate intent to injure - it's ******, you didn't have to show that with Thatcher ... but then again, Premier League, shown on match of the day therefore more important that little old Barnsley or some unknown fella called Hume and his career.

    FA? Aye reyt ...
     
  7. LiverpoolRed

    LiverpoolRed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Messages:
    14,791
    Likes Received:
    6,993
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom, 105653082800
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Didn't City step in and admit Thatcher was wrong >

    thought they'd banned him before FA did
     

Share This Page