Man City v West Ham Sun 28th August 16:00

[SALTIRE]

Match chat.

 

[claret50]

I've recorded this game as it coincides with a family bbq, I'm not really expecting anything from this - like a favourable result - due to our shoddy performance the other night against the pub team from Romania, maybe we could arrange a few matches against the Dagenham Girl Pipers where we might stand a chance of scoring!

 

[G-Dragon]

wow City looking class. Clear title favorites.

 

[JontheGill]

Somebody explain the palace HF chants coming from the crowd???

 

[Super_horns]

Too easy/good.

 

[Humongous Fungus]

City should be 3-0 up but dodgy ref decision has kept West Ham in this and they go and score down the other end.

 

[G-Dragon]

Their two new signings Gundogan and Sane haven't even played yet!

 

[Stevencc]

So what do we reckon, will Aguero escape a retrospective ban for his elbow on Reid or will the FA look the other way in a manner Silkyman reckons they only ever do to spite City rather than help them out?

 

[silkyman]

Very impressed with the way Sterling has started the season. That second goal was pure confidence from him. Stones is looking really good too. Fits in so well with the new system and you could see how important he already is with the moments of panic after he went off.

I'm still not convinced on the Hart situation. He's a better 'keeper than Willy, and City wouldn't have conceded that goal with Hart. It's all about his distribution, but every time the ball is back with him, the full backs are showing for it. Anyone can play the ball out 20 yards. I can understand he feels that Bravo is an upgrade, but why play demonstrably worse player in the opening games? I'm not Pep Guardiola though, so I can't really question him too much. But if you can turn Kolarov from a left back who everyone wanted rid of into a seemingly half decent, ball-playing centre-back...

 

[JimJams]

... Go on...

 

[Stevencc]

Strange, no mention of the Aguero elbow...

 

[claret50]

Strange, no mention of the Aguero elbow...

he could possibly miss the Man U/C derby this week.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...e-elbow-verdict-on-monday-and-could-miss-man/

 

[JoshBCFC]

Definitely an elbow by Aguero, he should really have been sent off to be honest.

 

[Stevencc]

he could possibly miss the Man U/C derby this week.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...e-elbow-verdict-on-monday-and-could-miss-man/

He certainly deserves some kind of retrospective punishment for it!

I suspect Silkyman's silence on the matter is an admission of that.

 

[G-Dragon]

Aguero will be banned for sure since City are playing FA's Darling Man United. Will be interesting to see if Lamela will also be banned.

 

[silkyman]

I've seen em given and I've seen em not given. Can't have many complaints if he is banned, because he lashed out. There was some argy bargy from both sides (see what I did there) and Aguero takes a hand in the face, too, but there we are. Hopefully Sane will be fit by the derby.

It is annoying that it will be because the ref claims that he didn't see it at the time. He was five yards away and looking right at it! Perhaps he should consider a different occupation.

 

[JimJams]

Why is it annoying? If he'd seen it you'd have been down to 10 men and he'd have faced a suspension, as he didn't see it he'll face the same suspension but you weren't handicapped in that game.
Him not seeing it has done you a favour.

 

[Stevencc]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37217071

He's been charged with violent conduct - potential three match ban coming.

 

[silkyman]

Why is it annoying? If he'd seen it you'd have been down to 10 men and he'd have faced a suspension, as he didn't see it he'll face the same suspension but you weren't handicapped in that game.
Him not seeing it has done you a favour.

Refs miss things in games all the time. How can he say he didn't see it when he was looking right at it is beyond me. He saw the incident and didn't deem it worthy of any further action at the time. The obvious comparison is with Rooney on the Wigan player.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/feb/28/wayne-rooney-elbow-no-charge

'Didn't see it but sort of saw it but not really, but still right to not do anything.'

 

[Tesl]

That Rooney one was ridiculous, but unfortunately does not absolve Aguero. He should have been sent off anyway and we can't complain too much about him being suspended, but obviously it's a big shame he'll miss the derby.

For the game itself, the first half is the best football I've seen us play since we murdered Spurs in Pelligrini's first season, so it's great to hit those heights already. Not sure what happened to us in the second half, but it still gives me tons of confidence we're in for a special year.

 

[silkyman]

I'm not arguing that he doesn't deserve it, but I don't like this behind closed doors stuff they do, based on which incidents that the press decide should get looked at. Ref is looking right at it, but 'didn't see it'? Fuck off. If he admitted seeing it and making a mistake, what then?

At least get rid of that element of it. It shouldn't matter if the ref saw it or not. If he got it wrong, he got it wrong. That way, at least it's openly fair for everyone, without get-out clauses for, say, England captains...

From Twitter:

"Aguero being banned doesnt bother me the FA insulting my intelligence by expecting me to believe that marriner didnt see it THAT bothers me."

He bottled it, like he bottled giving Masuaku a second yellow, despite about 12 'last warnings'. A pretty poor reffing performance all around, really.

 

[JimJams]

Seems very much like shifting the blame on the ref for Aguero getting himself suspended to me.

 

[AnimoEtFide]

Seems very much like shifting the blame on the ref for Aguero getting himself suspended to me.

To be fair he is also blaming the media.

 

[silkyman]

Ah... The members of the slow readers group are here.

I said very clearly earlier on that if he's banned it's his own fault. And if he isn't, then he's got away with one, like players 'get away with one' during the game all the time.

I'm just not a fan of the way the current 'retrospective action' system works. It's open to too much interpretation, and gives erratic results because of it. Not every potential infraction is sent before the panel for a start and then it's all very woolly and secretive.

 

[JimJams]

Ah... The members of the slow readers group are here.

Was that your own Twitter you quoted from then?

 

[G-Dragon]

Why was Lamela not charged then? Oh wait...they don't play United next!

 

[silkyman]

Was that your own Twitter you quoted from then?

No.

But do these things behind closed doors and have such random results from erratic selections of cases and you open yourself up to people not trusting it.

Just ditch the whole 'did/didn't see it' thing.

 

[Mr. Scruff]

So City are actually appealing this.

What's hillarious is they seem to be appealing not on the grounds he didnt do anything wrong, Nope thats obviously not true. Instead they are claiming a premier league official is lying on purpose to get a city player banned. Must be part of that worldwide conspiracy againsgt them they are always on about.

The thing is an offical could appear to be looking at something and still easily miss it. It happens in a split second, he could have been ball watching, he could have been looking lower down, he could have been caught in a moments thought or he even could have blinked and missed it. He might simply have not been able to process properly what he saw so didnt feel comfortable giving anything at the time.

City and there pathetic fan base are basically throwing their toys out of the pram because they aren't getting away with the crime on a technicality. To be honest I think alledging a premier league official is deliberately cheating you brings the game into disrepute as well as being a frivolous appeal, their should be further punsihment dished out on top of the 3 game ban he already should have got.

 

[silkyman]

Yes, it seems they were trying to get something on a technicality, although there was some argument about intent, contact etc. He was all over Aguero too. You can only punish retrospectively if the referee didn't see the incident. That's the rule. That's their rule. This was an 'on the ball' incident which the referee appears to have been looking directly at. If he was looking elsewhere, why? There were two players jumping for the ball in his eyeline. Was he distracted by a shiny object?

Like I said above, Aguero only has himself to blame for the ban, but if you make the key question over retrospective action 'did the referee see it' then don't be surprised when someone questions you on it.

Why not just get rid of that element completely, accept that referees make mistakes and punish missed red card offences regardless (even if they were booked or whatever) or accept that refs make mistakes and ditch retrospective punishment altogether. Totally transparent.

 

[silkyman]

Ahem.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/former-premier-league-referee-mark-8760242