Man CitHEHEHE

[Ian Royal]

If you have made the plunge before getting touched it is a dive and Milner was definitely in full dive position before he clipped the defender's boot with his shin. Had he been a Man U or Arsenal player, loads the media would have crucified him, but because nobody cares about Man City he gets away with it.

It was split second. Far to close to really spot it was a proper dive for sure.

Did anyone see cox for forest? That was the stupidest dive ive ever seen. If he'd just stayed on his feet 2 seconds longer the keeper was going to slide into him and take him out. Because he collapsed early faking contact he got nothing.

[AthleticoSpizz]

About time the FA retrospectively punish these feigning fannies?

http://hobnob.royals.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=100818&start=3240

[sandman]

A reference to Brendan Rodgers alleged extra curricular activities.

[No Fixed Abode]

City?

http://www.independent.ie/blog/mike-tys ... 45739.html

[Mr Optimist]

Think it says more about Irofln Mike Tyson than Manchester's finest.

[sandman]

He has actually heard of them and will reveal himself as a fan after they win the league ripping off a Man United shirt to reveal a City one before proceeding to punch David Moyes in the face and share a beer with Pellegrini.

[No Fixed Abode]

Think it says more about Irofln Mike Tyson than Manchester's finest.

I don't think so. Look at this way. If you go to New York, most people will have heard of the biggest franchise in Baseball, the New York Yankees. However, not many people will have heard of the New York Mets. It's the same with Manchester United (biggest franchise) and City.

[No Fixed Abode]

Worst refereeing decision of the season? It's got to be up there. Poor Tiote.

[Franchise FC]

Worst refereeing decision of the season? It's got to be up there. Poor Tiote.

I can only assume he thought that Gouffran was somehow in Hart's eyeline or diving area, in which case he would have been offside.
But of course he wasn't.

Not Mike Jones' only major mistake as the tackle on Nasri should have been red, plus numerous others where an already cautioned player commits a bookable offence and is 'let off' because he's already been booked (Cabaye is one example)

[URZZZZZ]

Worst refereeing decision of the season? It's got to be up there. Poor Tiote.

I can only assume he thought that Gouffran was somehow in Hart's eyeline or diving area, in which case he would have been offside.
But of course he wasn't.

Not Mike Jones' only major mistake as the tackle on Nasri should have been red, plus numerous others where an already cautioned player commits a bookable offence and is 'let off' because he's already been booked (Cabaye is one example)

how was he not offside, was stood about 3 feet in front of the keeper, how is that not interfering with play?

[URZZZZZ]

"'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball."

[USA_Loyal_Royal]

should have been a goal, absolutely inexcusable. i feel bad for the player because it was a world class strike.

the nasri tackle probably should have been a red as well.

poor ref.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

"'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball."

Quite

I can't understand how someone stood that close to the keeper can't be interfering with play

[Handsome Man]

I thought they had tidied up the rule in the summer to allow goals in this situation as long as the player doesn't touch the ball. At least Carragher was able to clear everything up at half-time with some incisive comment using precise knowledge of the rules and sympathy for referees interpretation of them.

[No Fixed Abode]

"'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball."

Quite

I can't understand how someone stood that close to the keeper can't be interfering with play

Newcastle player was about 4-5 yards to Harts left. So nowhere near him. The only thing obstructing Harts view was a line of City players.

[TBM]

"'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball."

Quite

I can't understand how someone stood that close to the keeper can't be interfering with play

How did he affect it? He wasn't infront of Hart so didn't interfer with him - the lino didn't even flag

[bobby1413]

"'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball."

Quite

I can't understand how someone stood that close to the keeper can't be interfering with play

How did he affect it? He wasn't infront of Hart so didn't interfer with him - the lino didn't even flag

I can accept almost all the reasons people are giving as reasons for it being disallowed - even though I don't really agree with some, I understand.

But I agree with you TBM, I don't get why it's disallowed and why the linesman didn't flag, and that he DID flag when the ref spoke to him.

[Sanguine]

should have been a goal, absolutely inexcusable. i feel bad for the player because it was a world class strike.

the nasri tackle probably should have been a red as well.

poor ref.

Particularly agreed on the challenge on Nasri. There's lots of debate about the two-footers and very late challenges we see, but this was a cynical and reckless 'slash' across Nasri's knees as he threatened to get away.

[Whore Jackie]

It was an amazing strike but what Harty says was that although the lad [Gouffran] wasn't blocking his view of the ball he was standing where he was going to dive, so Harty couldn't really make a dive. Harty also said he wasn't sure if he would have got it anyway, but Gouffran was in his way. If someone is in your way you are not going to dive on them.

[6ft Kerplunk]

Does Hart really think we believe that he was going to dive forwards into Gouffran who was moving away from both the ball and goal? It was past him and in the net before he'd even sorted his feet out to start his dive.