Manchester City Forums

Well, he was a wanker as a ref but it's nice to see that it wasn't just an act and that he is an actual wanker. He's spent years self-aggrandising but I did like hearing Andy Gray recently say refereeing has moved on a lot since Poll's day and he isn't relevant anymore.

Anyone seen this tackle? It looked to me more like he was attempting to hoof the ball clear and completely missed it

I don't think there was malice aforethought Like you sayhe just missed it.

_________________
The Senior Member

Fairly FUCKING rich from Graham '3 yellow cards to the same player in a WC match' Poll. Oh my days.....

_________________
KYPU

Not for me, I thought it was a horrific tackle that should've seen him walking down the tunnel and getting a decent length ban too. So high and reckless it's untrue. I read yesterday Dave Whelan saying he got the ball "clean as a whistle and just caught him on the follow through"... I'm amazed Wigan are trying to defend it, I know you wnat to look after your players but you've got to keep your credibility too.

For me it's the way he bends the leg backwards before extending it. If he was going in with malicious intent he would have gone in straight legged edit: e.g. knacker Keane on Haaland. As it was, he went with a kicking motion like he was attempting to clear the ball

That is BS Nods, even if it was an intended clearance/hoof as you suggest, he failed and risked an opponent's knee. That is atrocious by any stretch. Horrid tackle.

_________________
KYPU

I agree, as a tackle it would be horrible but it wasn't a tackle. It was a clearance

Dude you have to be aware of your feet for gods sake. You can't wander around a nightclub closing your eyes and punching the air and claim ignorance when you belt some cunt in the smacker.

_________________
KYPU

it was neither clearance nor tackle, it was assault. reckless, high and uncontrolled. can't believe whelan came out and said what he did, because you can clearly see him MISS THE FUCKING BALL with his flailing leg, and it only bounces off his standing foot after he clatters the poor bastard. makes it worse that his leg was straight as it made contact with the guy's knee, as it means the only thing absorbing the impact is said knee. awful challenge. fucking awful. don't think there was intent behind it, but it was so bad i thinbk that's utterly irrelevant.

in the ref's defence the commentary did say that his view was entirely obscured by another player, and you can't blow up or send someone off if you don't see it. which does rather handily leave it open for the FA to actually do something.

also poll can go fuck himself with a bag of dicks.

_________________
"It felt like a really pointless version of ketamine: no psychedelic effects, no pleasant slide into rubbery nonsense, just a sudden drop off the cliff of wrongness."
"i'm gonna wreck you so bad we're going to have to change church"

I think he's lucky most people seem to be giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying there was no intent. The reason I'm inclined to think there was (other than the fact that it was a ridiculous and unnatural way to challenge for the ball), was the way he immediately got up and sprinted after the ball. If he genuinely didn't mean to hurt the guy he would've been as shocked as anyone else when he clattered him and would've stopped and held his hand up or started waving the physio over. He must've felt (and possibly heard) the impact on the guys knee. The way he leapt to his feet and tried to paste over it by pretending nothing had happened suggests he had some degree of forethought to me.

Who gives a fuck whether he meant it or not anyway? We all know, for those that didn't already (myself included), from Nani's red card that the laws of the game do not mention intent

true, it makes little difference in terms of FA action or sanctions, but it matters in terms of "is he a cunt or just a bit too shit to make humane challenges"

_________________
"It felt like a really pointless version of ketamine: no psychedelic effects, no pleasant slide into rubbery nonsense, just a sudden drop off the cliff of wrongness."
"i'm gonna wreck you so bad we're going to have to change church"

I just meant with regards Wigan's attempt to justify it - what Whelan said and Martinez trying excuse it by describing it as a "striker's tackle".

Might not make any difference to his punishment but it makes quite a lot of difference to whether the guy's a nasty cunt or not.

EDIT: yeah that ^

You cunts are all on acid if you think he didn't mean that tackle. ABOVE knee height? Fucking prick.

_________________
KYPU

nah, that's bang on knee height, possibly below if the guys leg was 90 degrees to the ground rather than at an oblique angle, thus lowering the height his knee was at.

any word on how long it will be til the newcastle player is walking again?

_________________
"It felt like a really pointless version of ketamine: no psychedelic effects, no pleasant slide into rubbery nonsense, just a sudden drop off the cliff of wrongness."
"i'm gonna wreck you so bad we're going to have to change church"

Never. Due to unforeseen complications he's had to have his lower torso removed.

Callum McManaman escapes FA action over Haidara challenge
Comments (111)
Wigan forward Callum McManaman has escaped retrospective action from the Football Association over his challenge on Newcastle defender Massadio Haidara.

Haidara was taken off on a stretcher in the Latics' 2-1 win but the FA cannot take "retrospective action" as an official saw the incident take place.

The governing body says it does not wish to "re-referee" matches.

But Newcastle managing director Derek Llambias claims the FA's disciplinary process is " not fit for purpose".

Newcastle will contact the FA and the Premier League to ask for a change in the way such matters are handled.

Play media
McManaman tackle sparks angry fracas

The FA said: "Where one of the officials has seen a coming together of players, no retrospective action should be taken, regardless of whether he or she witnessed the full or particular nature of the challenge. This is to avoid the re-refereeing of incidents.

"In the case of McManaman, it has been confirmed that at least one of the match officials saw the coming together, though not the full extent of the challenge. In these circumstances retrospective action cannot be taken.

"The principal objective behind the 'not-seen' policy is to address off the ball incidents where match officials are unlikely to be in a position to witness misconduct."

On Monday it had been expected that McManaman would face further action from the FA.

Wigan chairman Dave Whelan defended McManaman, telling BBC Sport it was not a reckless challenge.

Newcastle, however, are angered by the failure to take further action.

Play media
Pardew dismayed by "awful" tackle

Llambias added: "It is clear from this decision that the current disciplinary procedures are not fit for purpose. Newcastle United, along with other clubs, have had players suspended for incidents reviewed after the game.

"Whilst not trivialising these incidents, they were not, in our opinion, of the seriousness of Callum McManaman's tackle on Haidara.

"Whilst we understand that the current procedures give the FA limited options, it cannot be correct that the most serious offences - those which have the potential to cause another player serious harm - can go unpunished, even if the original incident was seen by match officials.

"We will now be making a strong representation to the FA and the Premier League to see how a more appropriate, fair and even-handed disciplinary process can be introduced at the earliest opportunity to prevent incidents of this nature going unpunished in the future."

Llambias has also been critical of Whelan's assessment of the incident.

He added: "I am disappointed and surprised by the comments [Whelan] made, in particular his assertion that the tackle by Callum McManaman 'was a fair challenge'.

"It is our strongly held opinion that the tackle on Massadio was extremely dangerous and is the type of challenge that has the potential to cause serious harm and such was the force, and reckless and dangerous nature of the challenge, even end a player's career."

Newcastle are also unhappy with the way they were informed that McManaman will not face retrospective action.

Llambias said: "We were first notified of this decision by a national media outlet who received notification from the FA confirming the decision. This was prior to anyone from the FA having the courtesy to contact the club to let us know."

Haidara, 20, who joined from Nancy on a five-and-a-half-year deal in January, had been on the pitch for less than 10 minutes after replacing the injured Mathieu Debuchy.

McManaman, 21, who was making his first start in the Premier League, got a slight touch on the ball before following through and catching the defender on the knee and thigh.

_________________
The Senior Member

that is a fucking travesty.

how can the official see the coming together but not the full extent? you either see it or you don't, if it's obscured so you don't see the full extent then you haven't fucking seen it. the FA really are a fucking joke. i don't think anyone would've thought a three match ban for mcmanaman was undeserved.

_________________
"It felt like a really pointless version of ketamine: no psychedelic effects, no pleasant slide into rubbery nonsense, just a sudden drop off the cliff of wrongness."
"i'm gonna wreck you so bad we're going to have to change church"

A nonsense of a decision. The FA are always harping on about protecting players, bringing on new laws like no tackles from behind etc, but when someone does get seriously injured from a reckless tackle they don't do anything about it. Sends out very strange message IMO. As GA says, nobody would've minded if he'd got a 3 match ban. Wigan could easily do without a youngster on the fringes of the first team for a couple of weeks, and letting him off will only increase the bad feeling towards the club and player.

Graham Poll the man who'd said on SSN (referring to a tackle by John Terry) "You don't send the England captain off at Stamford Bridge"

WHAT??!!?

In that instant I knew referee's can be cheating twats