I don't get what makes you think they will hand out the same penalty next time. Last season and this, we saw players get away with far worse, wasn't that a precedent? Besides, it only went before the FA because all the officials didn't see it and the media went into meltdown.

 

 

 

I agree with a lot of what you are saying Davey, but the "getting away with far worse" is all down to interpretations and opinions.

 

We see plenty of bad tackles, some intentional, some just mis-timed that can look worse but in reality are all part of football. And elbows, often get a lot of attention and yet many aren't that bad - just the attacker letting the defender (or vice versa) know they can't take liberties. Sure, a proper elbow to the temple / eye socket has no place in the game, but the majority are rarely that bad.

A "stamp" is far worse IMO. If you stamp on a player, laying on the floor and go for any area with ligaments/ tendons it's as bad as it gets and can be a career finisher. Not saying Costa intended it to be that bad, but it's not something I like to see from any player. The FA had to act as players get away with that and do it again and then there's a serious injury...................................

 

Anyway DB, you have to stop with the paranoia and all this ant--Chelsea. It will eat you up. Don't worry - everything will be alright!

Edited January 30, 201511 yr by Nibs

Anyway DB, you have to stop with the paranoia and all this ant--Chelsea. It will eat you up. Don't worry - everything will be alright!

 

You're right Nibs. Darn, I hate saying that.

 

No hard feelings to anyone I've been arguing with over this, particularly Blue Daze.

 

I feel there are grave injustices against our club, and when it happens it makes me angry.

 

I think I might have to join you up over that hill.

The FA have just annonounced a new EPL match official has been apointed to take charge of tomorrow's game

 

 

 

 

 

Chris Foy has been named as the fourth official.

I understand where you are coming from Blue Daze. An agenda usually implies formally controlled top-down action. I really doubt if any of the media outlets have any bias chalked down in their mission statements.

 

An agenda, however, can also be the emergent consequence of concerted individual bias. I use the word very loosely here. For example, most stereotypes we see in the world media (and affect the lives of people) are not because of Government policy but are rather the result of the bottom up trickle of individual bias. The media in every country is a small sample of its people and will carry with it (in most cases) their prejudices and biases. It is inevitable. Is this an agenda? Not in the strictest sense of the word. It is nevertheless unfair in many cases. We want the world to run on rational thought alone. The best media houses will (and should) try to base every article on reason and evidence alone but I haven't seen many of those. Sometimes the individuals have agendas and sometimes they don't. Is it surprising that there are more individuals who do not like Chelsea and Jose than those who do? How do we expect the media to be otherwise?

 

On the same lines, are Costa/Suarez targeted more than anyone else? Does the FA have an agenda against them (and other Hispanic players)? Surely not. However, the cheating/diving/fighting stereotype will follow them around and once again it isn't surprising that individual bias trickles upwards. Maybe it is even their appearance, which is possibly why Aguero gets away with worse. Is there an agenda against thuggish/'ugly' looking people? Surely not. This is unfortunately an inherent part of the society we live in. Prejudices are everywhere and they trickle upwards.

 

Corruption is another matter altogether. I don't think the referees are corrupt. They get decisions wrong against all teams. They are just victims of simple inconsistency and natural bias, not against a club, but against individuals/races etc. This should not be but this is how it is. Only video referrals will solve the problem. It is too difficult to be completely oblivious to all the biases floating around the media nowadays.

 

The FA on the other hand is a singularly corrupt organization and they should be told so. Why can't they be more transparent? I absolutely detest governing bodies which do not explain their actions in detail to the public. What stops them from doing so? What stops them from retrospectively analyzing decisions which the referee has seen? Why are they so scared of freedom of speech? The political world is very frustrating but I'm sure something can be done about it.

One more thing.

 

Why can't dangerous play be seen for what it really is? Is a bite worse than a two footed lunge? Is a flailing arm (not an elbow) worse than going in studs up? Why is playacting tolerated at all?

 

The same actions in rugby made by bigger stronger individuals barely draws a response from the 'victim'. Football needs to become less superficial.

One more thing.

 

Why can't dangerous play be seen for what it really is? Is a bite worse than a two footed lunge? Is a flailing arm (not an elbow) worse than going in studs up? Why is playacting tolerated at all?

 

The same actions in rugby made by bigger stronger individuals barely draws a response from the 'victim'. Football needs to become less superficial.

 

I wouldn't care if the FA were consistent. If this happened in a non televised game such as Burnley vs Villa I highly doubt the person doing the stamping would be punished in the same way Costa has.

As an Oldham supporter first and a Chelsea fan, given my southern origins, I deplore the FA decision to ban Costa.

 

My first impression was that it was unfortunate but Costa was just getting on with it as he didn't look down and his movement was towards the field of play.  Most importantly, although he undeniably stood on Can, he did not 'stamp' on him.  He did not bring his foot down heavily of forcibly he was just trying to run on.

 

Where this all goes wrong is the media response which to my mind is to sensationalise and then all the tweeters, the wonders of social media, driving the gutless FA to ban him - always the easy way out for them.  Is the media picking on Chelsea - undoubtedly they are as it creates a story.  It is almost as if the ban is there to prove that they are not part of the 'conspiracy'.

 

This is the same FA that said and did nothing about Oldham's attempt to sign Ched Evans.  That subject was far too difficult for them.  Once again the media and social media storm and all the threats of violence stopped him pursuing his chosen career.

 

Hattrick for Drogba tomorrow would be nice!

Were there not too accused stamping incidents from the game on Tuesday?

Why have the media driven charged Costa for one and not the other. Seems more like a trial by media than the FA doing their jobs, it is their usual half-baked way of doing things.

Edited January 30, 201511 yr by axman2526

All those people thinking this sets a precedent, or expecting the FA to show consistency from now on ..

 

Excuse me for asking, but what planet are you on?

 

Have they ever shown any consistency about anything, why should they suddenly start now?

Because, hopefully, times are changing. The spotlight is shining on all sorts of corruption and injustice, even in football.  Can't be blamed for being an optimist and empathising with the Blues, JM, the fans and not to mention Costa!

City fan here.  Honestly lads, I think Costa knew exactly what he was doing and deserved the ban.  If I thought otherwise, genuinely I would say so.  The fact that he wasn't looking, actually makes it more damning because had he genuinely wanted to avoid Can, he would have been looking!

 

That's how I see it, many will doubtless disagree.  And I understand the dreadful inconsistency of it all, having been on the receiving end of that plenty ourselves.

 

On to the game, should be interesting.  We are playing utter sh*te at the moment, and you don't need to win.  So I think it may be a case of the Pitiful Force meets the Immovable Object and a boring 0-0.  Either that or we'll get reamed.  Hopefully the former.

Now that the FA have that out of the way, are they going to chase up the red scouse scum for the 2 (at least) throwing incidents ?

City fan here.  Honestly lads, I think Costa knew exactly what he was doing and deserved the ban.  If I thought otherwise, genuinely I would say so.  The fact that he wasn't looking, actually makes it more damning because had he genuinely wanted to avoid Can, he would have been looking!

 

That's how I see it, many will doubtless disagree.  And I understand the dreadful inconsistency of it all, having been on the receiving end of that plenty ourselves.

 

On to the game, should be interesting.  We are playing utter sh*te at the moment, and you don't need to win.  So I think it may be a case of the Pitiful Force meets the Immovable Object and a boring 0-0.  Either that or we'll get reamed.  Hopefully the former.

 

Oh I see, that's why Aguero got away with it, because he was looking, excellent logic.

 

Don't agree with the decision.  I think he was making a genuine football move to go after the ball, and without looking at the Liverpool player once trod on him, whilst said Liverpool player was trying to delay the game.

 

That said - his fate was sealed as soon as the performing seal Michael Oliver told the FA that he missed it and would have sent him off.  

 

Why no charge for Mr Oliver, as to why he missed such an act of "violent conduct" when the two players involved were 2 yards away from the ball?

Well jamie redknapp and co job done

We move on now time for remy or drogs to step up

Oh and as for stan collymore he can lick my ............

O

City fan here. Honestly lads, I think Costa knew exactly what he was doing and deserved the ban. If I thought otherwise, genuinely I would say so. The fact that he wasn't looking, actually makes it more damning because had he genuinely wanted to avoid Can, he would have been looking!

That's how I see it, many will doubtless disagree. And I understand the dreadful inconsistency of it all, having been on the receiving end of that plenty ourselves.

On to the game, should be interesting. We are playing utter sh*te at the moment, and you don't need to win. So I think it may be a case of the Pitiful Force meets the Immovable Object and a boring 0-0. Either that or we'll get reamed. Hopefully the former.

Maybe so, but definitely trial by media. And who benefits? You lot

Of course, which is probably why you posted in the first place.

Edited January 30, 201511 yr by NorthernMonkey

City fan here.  Honestly lads, I think Costa knew exactly what he was doing and deserved the ban.  If I thought otherwise, genuinely I would say so.  The fact that he wasn't looking, actually makes it more damning because had he genuinely wanted to avoid Can, he would have been looking!

 

That's how I see it, many will doubtless disagree.  And I understand the dreadful inconsistency of it all, having been on the receiving end of that plenty ourselves.

 

On to the game, should be interesting.  We are playing utter sh*te at the moment, and you don't need to win.  So I think it may be a case of the Pitiful Force meets the Immovable Object and a boring 0-0.  Either that or we'll get reamed.  Hopefully the former.

 

I believe it was genuine and the ban is right but that point you made right there is absolutely ridiculous.

 

Are you saying Costa is some sort of bloody mastermind that simulates the future in his head in a split second before he does anything? Could be the reason hes scored a lot of goals though.

 

No but seriously though I don't see how not looking makes it worse, that makes no sense at all, if he was looking at the player it would obviously be more damning, if he isn't looking at the player then he actually has an excuse.

Edited January 30, 201511 yr by Slawth

This season Costa, Aguero and Yaya Toure have all stamped on opposition players.  Guess which single one got banned?

So, redknapp and sky get what they wanted and now i suppose they will bleat about how much they like him as a player and how its a shame hes not playin tomorrow...t*ssers....it seems costa is the new suarez..

How long was Altidore banned for when he trod on Azpi's leg in the game v Sunderland last season? The incident is on the 3rd video down under the title goals, 4 seconds in:

http://livefootballvideo.com/highlights/england/premier-league/chelsea-vs-sunderland-2

 

Anyone remember?

How long was Altidore banned for when he trod on Azpi's leg in the game v Sunderland last season? The incident is on the 3rd video down under the title goals, 4 seconds in:

http://livefootballvideo.com/highlights/england/premier-league/chelsea-vs-sunderland-2

 

Anyone remember?

How does one forget the game where LFC fan from Wirral, Mike Dean, decided the title run in Liverpools favour.  What was it, a disallowed goal because Matic nudged someone slightly in an aerial challenge (not a foul ever),  Ramires was then wiped out by Larson (who doesnt even look at the ball, eyes only on taking out Ramires) in a rugby style challenge when going for a header, unmarked, in the 6 yard box with their goalie out of net(auto red and penalty, but nothing given), nothing given when O'Shea rugby tackled Cahill....and then that penalty LOL.

How does one forget the game where LFC fan from Wirral, Mike Dean, decided the title run in Liverpools favour.  What was it, a disallowed goal because Matic nudged someone slightly in an aerial challenge (not a foul ever),  Ramires was then wiped out by Larson (who doesnt even look at the ball, eyes only on taking out Ramires) in a rugby style challenge when going for a header, unmarked, in the 6 yard box with their goalie out of net(auto red and penalty, but nothing given), nothing given when O'Shea rugby tackled Cahill....and then that penalty LOL.

 

It was a handball by Matic wasn't it? he had his arms down by his side I think or something like that but it touched the ball, I can't really remember exactly though.

It was a handball by Matic wasn't it? he had his arms down by his side I think or something like that but it touched the ball, I can't really remember exactly though.

No, not a handball. It was a non-existent nudge in an aerial challenge that was picked up by a linesman who was an ex-Liverpool youth player.

Oh I see, that's why Aguero got away with it, because he was looking, excellent logic.

 

 

Do you expect me to say Aguero's was an accident and no punishment was appropriate?  Of course he should have been banned for that.

 

And I get the frustration at the inconsistencies, not that it's all one way traffic since we've been on the brunt of some howlers as well. 

 

But regards the "he wasn't looking so he's innocent" defence... watch the video FFS.  He knows exactly where Can's leg is and he knows exactly what he's doing.

 

Does it help us? Yes.  Is it annoying for you that he's got a ban, sure, I get that.  Should he have been banned?  Yes, I'm afraid he should.  You can't go letting people off because there's been other fouls that went unpunished.

Edited January 30, 201511 yr by Ronetta

How does one forget the game where LFC fan from Wirral, Mike Dean, decided the title run in Liverpools favour.  What was it, a disallowed goal because Matic nudged someone slightly in an aerial challenge (not a foul ever),  Ramires was then wiped out by Larson (who doesnt even look at the ball, eyes only on taking out Ramires) in a rugby style challenge when going for a header, unmarked, in the 6 yard box with their goalie out of net(auto red and penalty, but nothing given), nothing given when O'Shea rugby tackled Cahill....and then that penalty LOL.

Described by the totally unbiased Hansen as brilliant defending on that night's MotD.

It was a handball by Matic wasn't it? he had his arms down by his side I think or something like that but it touched the ball, I can't really remember exactly though.

I thought it was contact but having viewed the incident a dozen times (back then) I cant remember seeing a single thing that would legitimately cause the ref to blow his whistle.....and amazing the timing of the whistle because, correct me if I'm wrong, Matic knocks it down for Terry who then slots it home and after the ball is in the net, that's when  Dean blows the whistle.