I have no real sympathy for George Boyd, the Hull City forward who was at the centre of a rumpus in the match with Manchester City. He was shown to have spat at Joe Hart during the end of the confrontation (not that Joe knew or saw). The FA will no doubt deal with him with a ban, totally justifiably.
However, I am still perplexed at the outrageous and confrontational actions of Joe Hart being dealt with so weakly - with just the issuing of a yellow card. How on earth does his behaviour come to be acceptable? A yellow card is nothing, and Hart's vehement protestations were hardly necessary, sportsmanlike or reasonable. If he thought Boyd had dived, then he could have appealed to the referee, even though that would have been unnecessary and irrelevant. Instead, he decided that screaming at point blank range whilst nuzzling up close was the best course of action. Twat. The FA has missed putting right the weak stance adopted by the referee (Lee Mason) in terms of Hart's actions. The FA is hiding behind the usual (and tired) excuse that the incident was seen by and dealt with by the referee at the time. If this is how an experienced goalkeeper thinks he ought to behave, then he certainly does not deserve to be in goal for England.
Ramires manager to fail in his attempted to break a leg, which was fortunate considering the leg in question was not his own. Whatever the 'frustrations' involved in the tense game of football, there will NEVER be any excuse for jumping in with a stamping action on another player's leg. Let's hope that his actions result in something rather more than the standard 3-match ban; I doubt it, though. There's never retrospective input if the referee at the time managed to see an incident and deal with it (even if he is shown not to have dealt with it properly or sufficiently). So, calling the ref a cheating cunt, or a couple of handballs can get a player sent off, as can a two-footed stamp on an opponent's leg. I know what I think deserves the most severe consequence.
At the time of the transfer, I said that Moyes and Manchester United were mad to spend £27.5million on Fellaini. He was so very clearly not worth that money by a long shot. A 'long shot' is the chance of his making a success of things at Man Utd. At the moment he is not even justifying a tenth of his weekly wages, let alone the ludicrous fee!
Betfred has decided to refund £200,000 to punters who've placed bets on Manchester United to win the Premier League. How honourable and generous! The complete collapse of the side is of course shocking, but I find it totally amusing that a commercial operation like Betfred is voluntary giving money back, as it is in effect embarrassed about taking money off people so easily. What an indictment on Man Utd.
Nicklas Bendtner seems to think he is worth £104,000 per week! I am aware of quite a few examples of delusion in the world of football, but this one takes the biscuit. It seems that in the summer, he will be free to leave Arsenal, and any team wanting him would have no expense regarding a transfer fee. This is the basis for him claiming to be worth this weekly wage. I am sorry, chap, but there are a couple of zeroes too many. I reckon £1,040 per week is probably reasonable.
...
No comments:
Post a Comment