Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fergie let off

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Once again the FA FAIL to back their men on the frontline (referees). And we wonder why half of them cant be arsed!

    Comment


      #17
      To be honest I think it is the inconsistency that is annoying. Some days managers get bans, other times not. I don't see why there isn't clear guidelines as to what is acceptable. Managers should be able to criticise the referee/assistants performance but probably should have to stick within sensible bounds. Calling for a referee to not work next week is in my opinion going to far and managers should be asked to not to try and prejudice decisions that might have to be made by the FA or whoever is in charge of referees.

      The way Fergie in particular has been allowed to pressure the powers that be in the last 10 years is a bit of a joke. Especially as many managers of lower teams have been dealt with very harshly for much lesser offenses after much more blatantly having been badly treated.
      "The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, and breeds reptiles of the mind."
      -- William Blake

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Dessy View Post
        Once again the FA FAIL to back their men on the frontline (referees). And we wonder why half of them cant be arsed!
        Read it again...the FA are backing their man. It's an independant commission that has, for some reason, let Fergie and his gimp off the hook. The FA are considering appealing the decision.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Scratch View Post
          Read it again...the FA are backing their man. It's an independant commission that has, for some reason, let Fergie and his gimp off the hook. The FA are considering appealing the decision.
          Oops.

          Comment


            #20
            Why an independent commission by the way? Thought Soho Sqaure had their own disciplinary panel for these sort of things?

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by Dessy View Post
              Why an independent commission by the way? Thought Soho Sqaure had their own disciplinary panel for these sort of things?

              Don't know. I assume it's in the interests of fairness and legality, or something similar. I suppose the FA would have a biased opinion if they were to pursue punishment themselves, so both sides present there case to an independent outlet with no vested interest in either party?

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by Scratch View Post
                Don't know. I assume it's in the interests of fairness and legality, or something similar. I suppose the FA would have a biased opinion if they were to pursue punishment themselves, so both sides present there case to an independent outlet with no vested interest in either party?
                That's the nub of it. Under the old system the FA was both prosecutor and judge. I think it also benefits from the fines so its vested interest in the result was quite spectacular.
                Last edited by Neil Young; 29-05-08, 11:50 AM.
                .
                Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.



                May the Lord bless this post.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by Scratch View Post
                  Don't know. I assume it's in the interests of fairness and legality, or something similar. I suppose the FA would have a biased opinion if they were to pursue punishment themselves, so both sides present there case to an independent outlet with no vested interest in either party?
                  I'd of thought the fact that old whiskey nose and his sidekick have brought the game into disrepute with their antics would mean the FA should have a vested interest and should take direct action themselves?

                  Or are the conspiracy theories right? Is it easier for the FA to distance themselves in 'particular cases' and make a token gesture of an appeal if the decision made isn't deemed fair?

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by Dessy View Post
                    I'd of thought the fact that old whiskey nose and his sidekick have brought the game into disrepute with their antics would mean the FA should have a vested interest and should take direct action themselves?

                    Or are the conspiracy theories right? Is it easier for the FA to distance themselves in 'particular cases' and make a token gesture of an appeal if the decision made isn't deemed fair?
                    I think if the system hadn't been changed then all decisions would have been open to being overturned by a court of law.
                    .
                    Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.



                    May the Lord bless this post.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      What sort of message does this send out now, they claimed to be cutting down on abuse to referees from players but it's acceptable for managers (and other coaching staff)

                      Although there are differences between players and managers, how can the FA justify punishing Mascherano for the 'abuse' he gave the referee but let Fergie off for this, Just shows that the FA is either incompetent, inconsisent or (worst case) corrupt
                      The only gracious way to accept an insult is to ignore it; if you can't ignore it, top it; if you can't top it, laugh at it; if you can't laugh at it, it's probably deserved.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        So much for the FA appeal

                        FA - No appeal against United

                        The Football Association has announced that no appeal will be made after Sir Alex Ferguson and Carlos Queiroz escaped punishment for their controversial comments about referee Martin Atkinson and referees' chief Keith Hackett last season.

                        The Manchester United duo spoke out against the standard of officials following their FA Cup exit against Portsmouth earlier this year, but were found not guilty of improper conduct when an independent regulatory commission found that the charges could not be proven.

                        The FA was unhappy with that decision, however, and has been considering an appeal.

                        But the only grounds on which they could appeal are by demonstrating that 'no reasonable body could have come to' the original decision, and an FA spokesman has revealed that, after taking advice, they would not expect success.

                        "After careful consideration, including external legal advice, we have decided that an appeal would be unlikely to succeed given the limited basis on which appeals are allowed," he said.

                        "An appeal would therefore not be the right course of action.

                        "We remain surprised and disappointed at the original decision and we want to reiterate our support for Keith Hackett, Martin Atkinson and referees collectively."

                        Support

                        "Keith Hackett has an important job to do in managing the select group of referees and we fully support his work.

                        "Martin Atkinson and the other select group referees also have our full backing for the excellent job they do.

                        "We remain firmly of the view that the comments made by Sir Alex Ferguson and Carlos Queiroz were inappropriate.

                        "We wish to discourage such comments being made as they are not in the best interests of football.

                        "In light of the commission's decision, we will review the process by which we address inappropriate media comments about match officials by participants in the game."

                        http://www.skysports.com/story/0,195...687006,00.html

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Scum vs scum
                          Trey Nyoni: countdown to stardom- 2 years 1year 0.5 years

                          Comment


                            #28
                            What counts as evidence then?? Surely TV footage is enough, I mean if it's good enough for a court of law...
                            The only gracious way to accept an insult is to ignore it; if you can't ignore it, top it; if you can't top it, laugh at it; if you can't laugh at it, it's probably deserved.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Manager Sir Alex Ferguson is furious with Manchester United's fixture list for 2008/09 as his side face away trips after all six Champions League group games. (The ****rag)

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Please Fergie,die of a heart attack on the touchline against us in the 3rd game off the season.PLEASE

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X