leopold (U10439)
You are glad you lost?
I don't think Clattenburg is a bad ref. There are some that look like they've never kicked a ball ever.
Javier-Stevie&Aquilani (U7411)
Well, not glad exactly. I'm miffed we let a lead slip through our fingers. But on the other hand, if it sorts out the complacency then in the long run it'll be a good thing.
Of course Clattenberg is a bad ref,along with Atwell,Foy,Atkinson and Dean,the game is always with them in the headlines instead of them being in the background.Consistently inept and should be nowhere near high profile games as these matches are being spoilt with the ineptitude
Add Dowd to that list all useless
"Oh and why the hell did Lescott put his hand up in the air when your ex player Sturridge shot, no excuses for that. Deserved pen."
Are you serious? Have you ever even played football? Try running towards a player and then when 3 or 4 yards away realise the guy is going to blast a ball that is going to hit you right in the face ok? What do you do in that millisecond? you try to turn away from it, remember your momentum is forward and you have to suddenly change direction, now try doing this with your arms locked into your sides then realise just how stupid you really are.
"What was dubious about it? Lescott had his hands in the air and stopped the ball heading towards goal. Stonewall."
Epic fail!! watch it again, the ball would have gone well wide and even the after match analysts mentioned this fact.
Are you serious? Have you ever even played football? Try running towards a player and then when 3 or 4 yards away realise the guy is going to blast a ball that is going to hit you right in the face ok?
------------------------------------------------------
why did he not block his face then????? his hands were in the air behind his head!
He was twisting his body away as the shot struck him, note, "struck him" and it is impossible to react to these things and control what your arms are doing, it is completely different to hand to ball which is what he was penalised for and was not the case.
if his hands were not above his head i might agree with you but they were so.....
also if it was heading towards goal he would have been sent off for stopping a goalscoring oppertunity.
it wasn't so a penalty was justly awarded and no card given!
"also if it was heading towards goal he would have been sent off for stopping a goalscoring oppertunity."
Neither applied because he did not deliberately play the ball with his hand in my view, as previously stated try twisting away from a shot like that with your arms pinned to your side as you twist is impossible , try it, your arms come up naturally and where your hands are when the ball strike your hand is irrelevant as the ball struck you and not vice versa. We will have to agree to disagree me thinks as i believe the ball struck the hand and not the other way around.
I could never find the "ball-to-hand" not counting as hand ball rule..
lol your hands tend to come up to block your face,head,chest from taking a whack.
you are right in saying the ball struck his hand but his hands were above his head.... he was not shielding his body at all. if his hands were level with his head then that arguement may stand but the were way above his head
ManCityMan (U1189)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
"What was dubious about it? Lescott had his hands in the air and stopped the ball heading towards goal. Stonewall."
Epic fail!! watch it again, the ball would have gone well wide and even the after match analysts mentioned this fact.
==
Ridiculous
How is anyone meant to see at that pace if its 100% hitting the target?
It was towards goal, in the penalty area. There is no debate about that decision.
Get over it.
When does the ball have to be going towards the goal for it to be handball???
D.J. Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 4 minutes ago
When does the ball have to be going towards the goal for it to be handball???
===============
It doesn't, and is that what I said?
I was only responding to the City fan who said the shot was off target.
I said that it was going towards goal, thus rendering it a CLEAR penalty.
Ok?
Javier, that is who I was talking to!!
Chelseas was a certain pen, you just can't stick your arms up in the air and stop the ball ffs! You should have had a pen, and you should have been down to 9 men never mind 10! Clichey knew he was on a yellow, so going into a tackle he can't make like a loonley means you'll get sent off.....and as for the actions of Toure, well City have got away with that one! So OP, you need to take off your blue specs off mate and actually think about it!
Some good comments guys.
Still think that most Prem refs would have waved away penalty claims when that powerful shot struck Lescott.
Chelsea did a good job of getting under our skin.
You could see the boys were rattled, angry, irritated and had lost composure.
They'll have to learn from that one.
We move on.
No3. Obtain a dubious penalty to win.
==============================
If a handball in the box is dubious then you're a bit silly tbh.
Yet every handball which is far less obvious that United get away with in the box they probably scream blue murder and go on about how the refs and FA are in our pocket etc blah blah blah!
Fickle fans! I think City should have had a penalty in the first half but Chelsea's was a blatant penalty. Raise your arms in the area and you risk giving away a penalty. The whole ball to hand thing is irrelevant really. The hands shouldn't be up that high in the first place.
Sign in if you want to comment
Happy with that.........
Page 2 of 2
posted on 13/12/11
leopold (U10439)
You are glad you lost?
I don't think Clattenburg is a bad ref. There are some that look like they've never kicked a ball ever.
posted on 13/12/11
Javier-Stevie&Aquilani (U7411)
Well, not glad exactly. I'm miffed we let a lead slip through our fingers. But on the other hand, if it sorts out the complacency then in the long run it'll be a good thing.
posted on 13/12/11
Of course Clattenberg is a bad ref,along with Atwell,Foy,Atkinson and Dean,the game is always with them in the headlines instead of them being in the background.Consistently inept and should be nowhere near high profile games as these matches are being spoilt with the ineptitude
posted on 13/12/11
Add Dowd to that list all useless
posted on 13/12/11
"Oh and why the hell did Lescott put his hand up in the air when your ex player Sturridge shot, no excuses for that. Deserved pen."
Are you serious? Have you ever even played football? Try running towards a player and then when 3 or 4 yards away realise the guy is going to blast a ball that is going to hit you right in the face ok? What do you do in that millisecond? you try to turn away from it, remember your momentum is forward and you have to suddenly change direction, now try doing this with your arms locked into your sides then realise just how stupid you really are.
posted on 13/12/11
"What was dubious about it? Lescott had his hands in the air and stopped the ball heading towards goal. Stonewall."
Epic fail!! watch it again, the ball would have gone well wide and even the after match analysts mentioned this fact.
posted on 13/12/11
Are you serious? Have you ever even played football? Try running towards a player and then when 3 or 4 yards away realise the guy is going to blast a ball that is going to hit you right in the face ok?
------------------------------------------------------
why did he not block his face then????? his hands were in the air behind his head!
posted on 13/12/11
He was twisting his body away as the shot struck him, note, "struck him" and it is impossible to react to these things and control what your arms are doing, it is completely different to hand to ball which is what he was penalised for and was not the case.
posted on 13/12/11
if his hands were not above his head i might agree with you but they were so.....
posted on 13/12/11
also if it was heading towards goal he would have been sent off for stopping a goalscoring oppertunity.
it wasn't so a penalty was justly awarded and no card given!
posted on 13/12/11
"also if it was heading towards goal he would have been sent off for stopping a goalscoring oppertunity."
Neither applied because he did not deliberately play the ball with his hand in my view, as previously stated try twisting away from a shot like that with your arms pinned to your side as you twist is impossible , try it, your arms come up naturally and where your hands are when the ball strike your hand is irrelevant as the ball struck you and not vice versa. We will have to agree to disagree me thinks as i believe the ball struck the hand and not the other way around.
posted on 13/12/11
I could never find the "ball-to-hand" not counting as hand ball rule..
posted on 13/12/11
lol your hands tend to come up to block your face,head,chest from taking a whack.
you are right in saying the ball struck his hand but his hands were above his head.... he was not shielding his body at all. if his hands were level with his head then that arguement may stand but the were way above his head
posted on 13/12/11
ManCityMan (U1189)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
"What was dubious about it? Lescott had his hands in the air and stopped the ball heading towards goal. Stonewall."
Epic fail!! watch it again, the ball would have gone well wide and even the after match analysts mentioned this fact.
==
Ridiculous
How is anyone meant to see at that pace if its 100% hitting the target?
It was towards goal, in the penalty area. There is no debate about that decision.
Get over it.
posted on 13/12/11
When does the ball have to be going towards the goal for it to be handball???
posted on 13/12/11
D.J. Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 4 minutes ago
When does the ball have to be going towards the goal for it to be handball???
===============
It doesn't, and is that what I said?
I was only responding to the City fan who said the shot was off target.
I said that it was going towards goal, thus rendering it a CLEAR penalty.
Ok?
posted on 13/12/11
Javier, that is who I was talking to!!
posted on 13/12/11
Chelseas was a certain pen, you just can't stick your arms up in the air and stop the ball ffs! You should have had a pen, and you should have been down to 9 men never mind 10! Clichey knew he was on a yellow, so going into a tackle he can't make like a loonley means you'll get sent off.....and as for the actions of Toure, well City have got away with that one! So OP, you need to take off your blue specs off mate and actually think about it!
posted on 13/12/11
Some good comments guys.
Still think that most Prem refs would have waved away penalty claims when that powerful shot struck Lescott.
Chelsea did a good job of getting under our skin.
You could see the boys were rattled, angry, irritated and had lost composure.
They'll have to learn from that one.
We move on.
posted on 15/12/11
No3. Obtain a dubious penalty to win.
==============================
If a handball in the box is dubious then you're a bit silly tbh.
posted on 15/12/11
Yet every handball which is far less obvious that United get away with in the box they probably scream blue murder and go on about how the refs and FA are in our pocket etc blah blah blah!
Fickle fans! I think City should have had a penalty in the first half but Chelsea's was a blatant penalty. Raise your arms in the area and you risk giving away a penalty. The whole ball to hand thing is irrelevant really. The hands shouldn't be up that high in the first place.
Page 2 of 2