Manchester City

[JacknDanny]

Definitely a shout for a penalty earlier on but that one in the dying minute was nailed on. Not giving that cost us the three points and that's why I want Video reffing. Ridiculous decision.

2 disgraceful decisions at the end there.

Foul on Sergio just outside the box and as clear a penalty on Sterling. No excuse for the ref as he had an unobstructed view.. Just terrible reffing.

Decent enough performance from the lads defensively. But Navas!!!!!!! Stop, start, turn around and start again!! I would like to know what his conversion of attempted crosses are?

Silva looked better when he came on. But should have taken off Navas with 30 minutes to go.

[Bredbury Blue]

Independent

"But the cold, hard facts of this City season are clear. Manuel Pellegrinis side have won only four of their last nine Premier League fixtures and not managed back-to-back victories since mid-October. It was a measure of this seasons relentless unpredictability that Liverpools equaliser against Arsenal came after both sides had left the field here, preventing the gap to the top climbing to an uncomfortable five points. But champions generally manage to beat 11th placed sides at home, whatever their resistance, and with City nothing tends to seem certain."

[Bredbury Blue]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-penalty-controversy-top-10732481

Former referee Dermot Gallagher has said that the official who failed to spot thefoul on Raheem Sterlingwhich should have given Manchester City a late penalty against Everton, got it wrong.

In the the past few games we've had quite few decent penalty shouts not given...last night's penalty shout looked a penalty so I can only assume that from the refs viewing angle it wasn't 100% clear.

[Bredbury Blue]

http://www.stdomingos.com/howard-repays-martinez-faith-but-may-should-still-be-the-end-of-the-road-five-talking-points-from-the-man-city-match/

The decision not to delay the kick-off of the game was a real kick in the teeth for loyal fans of both Everton and Manchester City. Anyone who attempted to travel to the game will be well aware of the awful traffic issues around Manchester, not just on the road network but also the tram system as well. The game however, kicked-off as normal, with thousands of fans still outside the ground leaving large sections of the Etihad sparsely populated. A delay of 30 minutes would have been a sensible decision and one that would have rewarded loyal supporters who were trying to make their way to a game after a long day at work. I am aware from their Twitter account that the Everton Supporters Trust are already looking to speak with the police and the two clubs to understand why the decision to proceed as normal was taken and it will be an interesting one to follow, especially considering 8,000 Evertonians will be making the return trip to Manchester in 2 weeks time.

[Chicog]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-penalty-controversy-top-10732481

Former referee Dermot Gallagher has said that the official who failed to spot thefoul on Raheem Sterlingwhich should have given Manchester City a late penalty against Everton, got it wrong.

In the the past few games we've had quite few decent penalty shouts not given...last night's penalty shout looked a penalty so I can only assume that from the refs viewing angle it wasn't 100% clear.

I think the way the ball popped off Sterling's foot made it look like the defender had got the ball.

And the linesman was unsighted.

It happens. They do even themselves out over a season.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Chicog

[wilai]

http://www.stdomingos.com/howard-repays-martinez-faith-but-may-should-still-be-the-end-of-the-road-five-talking-points-from-the-man-city-match/

The decision not to delay the kick-off of the game was a real kick in the teeth for loyal fans of both Everton and Manchester City. Anyone who attempted to travel to the game will be well aware of the awful traffic issues around Manchester, not just on the road network but also the tram system as well. The game however, kicked-off as normal, with thousands of fans still outside the ground leaving large sections of the Etihad sparsely populated. A delay of 30 minutes would have been a sensible decision and one that would have rewarded loyal supporters who were trying to make their way to a game after a long day at work. I am aware from their Twitter account that the Everton Supporters Trust are already looking to speak with the police and the two clubs to understand why the decision to proceed as normal was taken and it will be an interesting one to follow, especially considering 8,000 Evertonians will be making the return trip to Manchester in 2 weeks time.!)

Errr....Anyone 'Well aware' would leave earlier and allow plenty of time to get to the ground, especially as it is only a 25 minute walk (from centre of town)

As for delaying the kick off by 30 minutes....Surely that would put the trickies in danger of missing the last train home to Prestatyn

Edited January 14, 2016 by wilai

[Bredbury Blue]

Severe delays were caused by a crash involving four cars on the M62, with Merseyside Police advising fans to use the East Lancs road or M56 to get there.As well as trouble on the roads, trams were terminating at Piccadilly due to a car on the tracks at Holt Town, between the city centre and the stadium.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/hundreds-blues-fans-miss-kick-10731193

[Bredbury Blue]

To fellow blues

If you get a chance, have a listen to this week's episode of Blue Tuesday on BBC Radio Manchester. It's about City memories and has a lovely old guy on who's City's oldest fan at 100yrs old (from Fallowfield) who's very lovely and amusing, Peter Barnes and City's oldest surviving player 93 yr old Ivor Broadis. Very enjoyable hour, fascinating to hear about going to football in the 30s and 50s.

[mrbojangles]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-penalty-controversy-top-10732481

Former referee Dermot Gallagher has said that the official who failed to spot thefoul on Raheem Sterlingwhich should have given Manchester City a late penalty against Everton, got it wrong.

In the the past few games we've had quite few decent penalty shouts not given...last night's penalty shout looked a penalty so I can only assume that from the refs viewing angle it wasn't 100% clear.

I think the way the ball popped off Sterling's foot made it look like the defender had got the ball.

And the linesman was unsighted.

It happens. They do even themselves out over a season.

I know they happen but it doesn't make it right or acceptable and I've never seen any statistical data to suggest that they do even themselves out.

Bring on video replays ASAP. And that isn't just a reaction from the other night as I have been an advocate for video replays for years. A decision should be made correctly at the time, you shouldn't have to hope that you get a favourable decision go your way at some point in the future, to even itself out.

[Chicog]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-penalty-controversy-top-10732481

Former referee Dermot Gallagher has said that the official who failed to spot thefoul on Raheem Sterlingwhich should have given Manchester City a late penalty against Everton, got it wrong.

In the the past few games we've had quite few decent penalty shouts not given...last night's penalty shout looked a penalty so I can only assume that from the refs viewing angle it wasn't 100% clear.

I think the way the ball popped off Sterling's foot made it look like the defender had got the ball.

And the linesman was unsighted.

It happens. They do even themselves out over a season.

I know they happen but it doesn't make it right or acceptable and I've never seen any statistical data to suggest that they do even themselves out.

Bring on video replays ASAP. And that isn't just a reaction from the other night as I have been an advocate for video replays for years. A decision should be made correctly at the time, you shouldn't have to hope that you get a favourable decision go your way at some point in the future, to even itself out.

That might work if the ball goes out, but what if it doesn't? Is the ref supposed to blow the whistle and ask for a review every time he's not sure he's got a decision right?

What if the opposing team goes up to the other end and scores, and then there's a break in play; the ref reviews it, decides it is a penalty and chalks off the other goal?

Stupid idea and fraught with the danger of turning the game into a farce.

Suck it up big boy, it happens to every team, Olly had a nailed on penalty turned down the other week and you didn't hear me complain.

Instead of whinging about the fact you didn't get a penalty decision, whinge about the fact your strikers couldn't put the ball in the net.

[mrbojangles]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-penalty-controversy-top-10732481

Former referee Dermot Gallagher has said that the official who failed to spot thefoul on Raheem Sterlingwhich should have given Manchester City a late penalty against Everton, got it wrong.

In the the past few games we've had quite few decent penalty shouts not given...last night's penalty shout looked a penalty so I can only assume that from the refs viewing angle it wasn't 100% clear.

I think the way the ball popped off Sterling's foot made it look like the defender had got the ball.

And the linesman was unsighted.

It happens. They do even themselves out over a season.

I know they happen but it doesn't make it right or acceptable and I've never seen any statistical data to suggest that they do even themselves out.

Bring on video replays ASAP. And that isn't just a reaction from the other night as I have been an advocate for video replays for years. A decision should be made correctly at the time, you shouldn't have to hope that you get a favourable decision go your way at some point in the future, to even itself out.

That might work if the ball goes out, but what if it doesn't? Is the ref supposed to blow the whistle and ask for a review every time he's not sure he's got a decision right?

What if the opposing team goes up to the other end and scores, and then there's a break in play; the ref reviews it, decides it is a penalty and chalks off the other goal?

Stupid idea and fraught with the danger of turning the game into a farce.

Suck it up big boy, it happens to every team, Olly had a nailed on penalty turned down the other week and you didn't hear me complain.

Instead of whinging about the fact you didn't get a penalty decision, whinge about the fact your strikers couldn't put the ball in the net.

You haven't thought that post through very well have you.

I can appreciate that you are probably from the "I don't like change" brigade but change can be for the better. Look at the goal line technology, had loads of naysayers but it hasn't interrupted the game one iota and has been a positive step.

If we look at the other night, the ball had gone out of play anyway so that wouldn't have interrupted play. However, if the ball hadn't gone out, they could do the same as the goal line technology does and play on unless the video ref signals to the ref a penalty is to be awarded. Either that or the captain of each team is allowed 1 referral in each half.

There's just too much at stake nowadays for bad decisions to be allowed. Can you imagine with all the money coming into play next season if a team gets relegated down to a bad decision.

[Bredbury Blue]

Chicog, it's irrelevant about City's strikers the other night, it's irrelevant that the penalty involved City, what is relevant is that these types of incidents of was it a sending off/penalty are far too frequent and with modern technology they could be pretty much eradicated from the major leagues (be difficult to eradicate at all football matches obviously as you'd need either tv cameras for use or more officials at every game which ain't going to happen). Every season they bring in new laws or revisions to the laws of the game, there's no reason why this couldn't be revised. I'm sure none of us want to watch +90 minutes of a game for the result to be spoiled by a wrong decision/result.

If in the last seconds of the final deciding game of the season between Arsenal vs whoever, a penalty kick definitely should have been given but wasn't and you lose the premier to that rival when you would have been champions had the ref got it right, would you be so blasé about this?

There's a problem that could be put right and should be put right.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Bredbury Blue

[Bredbury Blue]

Loved this article...will wind up red scousers and our neighbours from Trafford Park. ;-)

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/pep-guardiola-manchester-united-manchester-10734591

[Chicog]

You haven't thought that post through very well have you.

I can appreciate that you are probably from the "I don't like change" brigade but change can be for the better. Look at the goal line technology, had loads of naysayers but it hasn't interrupted the game one iota and has been a positive step.

If we look at the other night, the ball had gone out of play anyway so that wouldn't have interrupted play. However, if the ball hadn't gone out, they could do the same as the goal line technology does and play on unless the video ref signals to the ref a penalty is to be awarded. Either that or the captain of each team is allowed 1 referral in each half.

There's just too much at stake nowadays for bad decisions to be allowed. Can you imagine with all the money coming into play next season if a team gets relegated down to a bad decision.

So now you are advocating live refereeing by television.

Ridiculous to say the least.

Why don't you go one step further and let the viewers vote on it?

[Chicog]

Chicog, it's irrelevant about City's strikers the other night, it's irrelevant that the penalty involved City, what is relevant is that these types of incidents of was it a sending off/penalty are far too frequent and with modern technology they could be pretty much eradicated from the major leagues (be difficult to eradicate at all football matches obviously as you'd need either tv cameras for use or more officials at every game which ain't going to happen). Every season they bring in new laws or revisions to the laws of the game, there's no reason why this couldn't be revised. I'm sure none of us want to watch +90 minutes of a game for the result to be spoiled by a wrong decision/result.

If in the last seconds of the final deciding game of the season between Arsenal vs whoever, a penalty kick definitely should have been given but wasn't and you lose the premier to that rival when you would have been champions had the ref got it right, would you be so blasé about this?

There's a problem that could be put right and should be put right.

They are actually trialling it from next season.

I think it detracts from the game.

You already have cricket umpires too scared to make decisions now and who just refer it upstairs automatically.

[Bredbury Blue]

^I agree with you that 'additional stoppages' to adjudicate was it or wasn't it detract from the flow of the game but I can accept that if it means cutting out the big wrong reffing decisions.

In what league are they "actually trialling it from next season"?

[mrbojangles]

^I agree with you that 'additional stoppages' to adjudicate was it or wasn't it detract from the flow of the game but I can accept that if it means cutting out the big wrong reffing decisions.

In what league are they "actually trialling it from next season"?

Go to the last post I put up in this thread the other day

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/857151-time-for-football-to-go-to-the-tmo/

[mrbojangles]

You haven't thought that post through very well have you.

I can appreciate that you are probably from the "I don't like change" brigade but change can be for the better. Look at the goal line technology, had loads of naysayers but it hasn't interrupted the game one iota and has been a positive step.

If we look at the other night, the ball had gone out of play anyway so that wouldn't have interrupted play. However, if the ball hadn't gone out, they could do the same as the goal line technology does and play on unless the video ref signals to the ref a penalty is to be awarded. Either that or the captain of each team is allowed 1 referral in each half.

There's just too much at stake nowadays for bad decisions to be allowed. Can you imagine with all the money coming into play next season if a team gets relegated down to a bad decision.

So now you are advocating live refereeing by television.

Ridiculous to say the least.

Why don't you go one step further and let the viewers vote on it?

I'm advocating that there are many ways that could be explored using video technology but to reduce stopping the game, it's called thinking outside of the box. I.E. the ref could carry on playing but if he sees a dodgy decision he could signal for assistance or refer it upstairs, or the ref upstairs could signal if he sees something the on field ref didn't see. The ref currently carries on playing for goal line technology and he only stops playing when a computer tells him to. Who'd a thowt it eh.

The thing is, whatever idea they come up with, it will be trialled first and if it works great, if not it's back to the drawing board.

I get it that you are against change, on that we will agree to disagree but just because someone has a different view you don't need say they are "ridiculous" and "stupid" it really does show a lack of debating skills.

[Bredbury Blue]

It's been over a year since I've been home and took in a game, but don't the clubs show the live game on the stadium big screens as the game progresses - feel free to correct me if that's wrong. So the fans see the incidents. The 4th official (or have a 5th official just for tv camera reviews) could be provided with a tv monitor with the tv pictures we all get to see or taking it further they could be able to request the tv producer run back specific angles. Premiership football is a mega money industry and wrong decisions can hit a club badly, while extra officials, tv monitors for an official to watch, etc, are peanuts.

[Bredbury Blue]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-penalty-controversy-top-10732481

Former referee Dermot Gallagher has said that the official who failed to spot thefoul on Raheem Sterlingwhich should have given Manchester City a late penalty against Everton, got it wrong.

In the the past few games we've had quite few decent penalty shouts not given...last night's penalty shout looked a penalty so I can only assume that from the refs viewing angle it wasn't 100% clear.

I think the way the ball popped off Sterling's foot made it look like the defender had got the ball.

And the linesman was unsighted.

It happens. They do even themselves out over a season.

I know they happen but it doesn't make it right or acceptable and I've never seen any statistical data to suggest that they do even themselves out.

Bring on video replays ASAP. And that isn't just a reaction from the other night as I have been an advocate for video replays for years. A decision should be made correctly at the time, you shouldn't have to hope that you get a favourable decision go your way at some point in the future, to even itself out.

Regarding statistical records. The table in this article implies that the incorrect reffing results over 21 rounds of games do NOT even themselves out (over 38 rounds?) and some clubs are disadvantaged by poor incorrect referee decisions/non-decisions.

Ref Review: The incorrect decisions from week 21

http://www.teamtalk.com/news/ref-review-the-incorrect-decisions-from-week-21

]

[Chicog]

I get it that you are against change, on that we will agree to disagree but just because someone has a different view you don't need say they are "ridiculous" and "stupid" it really does show a lack of debating skills.

Oh don't play that card, you're the one that specifically said " play on unless the video ref signals to the ref a penalty is to be awarded."

I'm sorry, but what you are talking about is live refereeing by television - and that *is* ridiculous.

I'm OK with goal-line technology because it's black and white and the decision is nigh-on instantaneous.

What you are talking about is introducing technology that will fundamentally change a free-flowing game into a stop-start one.

It works in Rugby, Tennis and Cricket because it does not interfere with the flow of the game.

It will not work in football in the way you describe. It will ruin it.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Chicog

[mrbojangles]

I'm sorry, but what you are talking about is live refereeing by television - and that *is* ridiculous.

In your opinion without even trialling it first

What you are talking about is introducing technology that will fundamentally change a free-flowing game into a stop-start one.

Don't know how much footy you actually watch if you didn't already realise it was a stop-start game anyway. This article is a couple of years old but I don't see how anything could have changed much in the meantime "Over the last three Premier League seasons the ball has been in play on average for 55 minutes 52 seconds, 56 minutes 22 seconds and 56 minutes 34 seconds respectively. That means over a third of the running time is lost in one way or another." http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/mar/11/breaking-the-law-injury-time-referees

It will not work in football in the way you describe. It will ruin it.

Maybe, maybe not but again, that's your opinion without even giving it a trial.

[Bredbury Blue]

^Nice find, but very disturbing to know that the ball is 'dead' so much - I definitely didn't know the situation was that bad. Maybe in top level football the clock should stop for deadball time...give the fans their monies worth in what has become a bloody expensive spectator sport and cut out time wasting - the game could flow even more..again, not difficult to administer if people wanted it.

[Bredbury Blue]

https://youtu.be/lbKRraxr6vg

RIP ...City fan

[JacknDanny]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-penalty-controversy-top-10732481

Former referee Dermot Gallagher has said that the official who failed to spot thefoul on Raheem Sterlingwhich should have given Manchester City a late penalty against Everton, got it wrong.

In the the past few games we've had quite few decent penalty shouts not given...last night's penalty shout looked a penalty so I can only assume that from the refs viewing angle it wasn't 100% clear.

I think the way the ball popped off Sterling's foot made it look like the defender had got the ball.

And the linesman was unsighted.

It happens. They do even themselves out over a season.

So if the ref thought the ball had come off the defender, why did he not award a corner?

He awarded a goal kick.

In that situation where the ref is 4 yard away, it doesnt need a linesmans opinion, the referee clearly should have seen it and given it.

With the way the game has developed over the years...got a lot faster. And with the huge amounts of money being ploughed into it, along with technological developments which are available... it would be madness NOT to use some of them to lessen the burden on the referee.

[Bredbury Blue]

I've read loads of national, Liverpool and Manchester press reports and fan blogs, and everyone states it was a very clear penalty; only Everton's manager (who I like a lot) thought it not a penalty.

[Chicog]

So you didn't get a penalty and now we have to change the rules just for you.

[Chicog]

Don't know how much footy you actually watch if you didn't already realise it was a stop-start game anyway. This article is a couple of years old but I don't see how anything could have changed much in the meantime "Over the last three Premier League seasons the ball has been in play on average for 55 minutes 52 seconds, 56 minutes 22 seconds and 56 minutes 34 seconds respectively. That means over a third of the running time is lost in one way or another." http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/mar/11/breaking-the-law-injury-time-referees

So what are you advocating now, that the video referee comes into play at the next break, like a throw in, or a corner, or a....

Penalty decision at the other end.

You just can't see it, can you?

[wilai]

^ Messrs East, Beck, Lennard and Oliver apparently agree with Martinez Oh....and get a life (I've read loads of national, Liverpool and Manchester press reports and fan blogs)..,,,,,,,,,,.FF S

[Chicog]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-penalty-controversy-top-10732481

Former referee Dermot Gallagher has said that the official who failed to spot thefoul on Raheem Sterlingwhich should have given Manchester City a late penalty against Everton, got it wrong.

In the the past few games we've had quite few decent penalty shouts not given...last night's penalty shout looked a penalty so I can only assume that from the refs viewing angle it wasn't 100% clear.

I think the way the ball popped off Sterling's foot made it look like the defender had got the ball.

And the linesman was unsighted.

It happens. They do even themselves out over a season.

So if the ref thought the ball had come off the defender, why did he not award a corner?

I'm guessing because he thought it was a goal kick?