The Ref Stop

Bravo in the Manchester Derby

bloovee said:
I didn't know there was any serious doubt that FFP was targeted at City (and owners willing to invest rather than take money out of the game).

But not just United, but the Milan clubs too. Did you not read the article?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3787806/Europe-s-elite-shafting-poor-enjoy-Leicester-City-can.html
"That Giorgio Marchetti, UEFA's director of club competitions, should be one of the prime movers in the reorganisation of the Champions League co-efficients is no doubt purely coincidental. Marchetti was born in Luino, north of Milan, was educated in Milan, and supports Milan. Not that he will have let that cloud his thinking when plotting this new course — or allowed Milan's enormous self-regard to skew the competition in their favour."

Let's say City came second in the PL and United scraped fourth - Gill's team would go straight to the group stage (whereas now the 4th placed English club would need a play-off game). Under the new coefficient rules (replacing the current ones which only came in a couple of years ago when ancient success in European competition was restricted to the last five years) then United could be in a higher pot (so playing weaker teams) because of Law, Best and Charlton (and Stepney). And - even if they lost all six group games and City won the competition - United would get more money from the TV rights.

It doesn't need an enquiring mind. Remarkably, most journalists seem to be ignoring it. Don't forget what the incentive is:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...he-Premier-League-says-Richard-Scudamore.html
Click to expand...

i was under the impression england (and italy, germany and spain) would get 4 automatic group stage champions league places?

not that that should take away from the fact that the ac milan and united both jump ahead of city in the coefficient rankings as a result of the new weightings which will no doubt result in a more favorable draw with better chances of progressing.
 
The Ref Stop
bloovee said:
Belatedly - here's why it shouldn't have been a penalty. Rooney shouldn't have been on the pitch. (And it doesn't include his clear dissent to the referee.)
https://twitter.com/MCFCworld/status/774742914836598785/video/1

But I've raised before the arbitrary nature of which incidents the FA reviews for retrospective action (under a concession from UEFA who didn't like games to be re-refereed). Mike Riley's said they don't look at all incidents, just those highlighted in the media. Now just suppose a broadcaster had an interest in promoting one club - let's call it Manchester United, in whom Sky once held shares. Would they put on a loop an incident which showed a rival team's player throwing an elbow back at an opponent? Yes, they would - Aguero. So why is it that this is the only clip of Ibrahimovic's (very) serious foul play against Otamendi, rather than its being shown over and over again? (I won't bother with the Fellaini elbow on Kolarov.)
https://player.vimeo.com/video/182687642
Click to expand...

Yawn, you won the league in 2012 from referee ineptitude and you still whinge
How mnay games did Hart get for sticking his head on Mr Oliver again?
The FA has form for letting complete w*nk*rs get away with murder. So your Rooneys, Fellainis, Costas, Terrys, Gerrards always got away with more than they got done for. However elbowing someone in the face on a telvised game will lead to a ban 90% of the time.
I must concede Fellaini gets away with severeal elbows a season. I'd love to see him him AND Rooney suspended, they're an embarassment!!
As fro Rooney, he's always been untouchable. Refs want to keep their job and the EPL want the likes of Rooney playing not suspended!
 
Last edited:
bloovee said:
I didn't know there was any serious doubt that FFP was targeted at City (and owners willing to invest rather than take money out of the game)
Click to expand...
That's a bit different to your original position which was that FFP was part of a plot by Manchester United to undermine City.
Some might say "willing to invest" others might say "distorting the competitive balance, and using insane amounts of money to drive up transfer fees and wages to the detriment of most teams" and that is what FFP was designed (in part) to fight against. It undoubtedly helped to entrench some vested interests - Chelsea, Arsenal, Real Madrid, Barcelona, most German teams and the wealthier Italian teams as well as United - but I don't think that you can claim that it was just about Utd vs City...
 
Peter Grove said:
Bloovee, you do understand that not everything in football is a two-pronged conspiracy to simultaneously "do down" Manchester City while unfairly favouring Manchester United, don't you? :)
Click to expand...

Save your breath, this one was still talking about Man Utd days after his club won their first league in 44 years.....
 
Have to disagree here, one side looks worse that the other but I agreed with the ref on the day... play on.... football is about opinions and it didn't tick any red card box for me, tough tackle but fair...old school ref here of course.....

In contradiction I've argued that Chris Basham's RC for SUFC v Scunthorpe on Saturday was red when every supporter and manager thought it was harsh and at worst yellow. Have a look
 
McTavish said:
That's a bit different to your original position which was that FFP was part of a plot by Manchester United to undermine City.
Some might say "willing to invest" others might say "distorting the competitive balance, and using insane amounts of money to drive up transfer fees and wages to the detriment of most teams" and that is what FFP was designed (in part) to fight against. It undoubtedly helped to entrench some vested interests - Chelsea, Arsenal, Real Madrid, Barcelona, most German teams and the wealthier Italian teams as well as United - but I don't think that you can claim that it was just about Utd vs City...
Click to expand...

I didn't say that, you did. I'm saying that FFP was obviously aimed at City (and PSG) and, that having failed, the vested interests in maintaining the "old school" oligarchy have now managed to change the rules (back) to their advantage (based on results when most people weren't even born), with a United director behind it. How is it a referee in the EPL has to declare which team he supports because of the perception of bias, but it's OK for a club executive to make rules for his club's benefit?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top