Massadio Haïdara

[Ishmael]

Don't think this is corruption, it's stupidity. Don't see why they'd favour Wigan.

 

They are supporting a young English player as well as protecting the officials from criticism.

 

 

 

He is scottish I think

 

Englander, my friend.

[wormy]

Don't think this is corruption, it's stupidity. Don't see why they'd favour Wigan.

 

They are supporting a young English player as well as protecting the officials from criticism.

 

 

 

He is scottish I think

 

England U20 international born in Liverpool.

[Spider Jerusalem]

If Wigan do stay up then we should forfeit the game at their place.  We play shite there anyhow and we would be depriving them of the much-needed funding that they get from our magnificent support.

 

Just don't take up the allocation of tickets.

[Rebellious]

Don't think this is corruption, it's stupidity. Don't see why they'd favour Wigan.

 

They are supporting a young English player as well as protecting the officials from criticism.

 

 

 

He is scottish I think

 

Englander, my friend.

 

K the Sun got it wrong

 

 

CALLUM McMANAMAN will NOT be punished by the FA for his shocking studs-up hack on Massadio Haidara.

 

The Wigan bruiser put Newcastle’s Haidara in hospital with the lunge during the Latics’ 2-1 win on Sunday.

 

McManaman escaped punishment during the game with referee Mark Halsey admitting he did not see the tackle.

 

It had been expected that McManaman would face restrospective action from the FA.

 

Yet the Scot is in the clear after he was today told that FA bosses will NOT punish him — because at least one official DID see the incident.

 

The FA said: “The FA can confirm that no action can be taken against Wigan’s Callum McManaman retrospectively following his side’s game against Newcastle United on Sunday 17 March 2013.

 

“In the summer it was agreed that retrospective action should only be taken in respect of incidents which have not been seen by the match officials.

 

“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 Callum 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.”

 

The decision has been slammed by Newcastle’s managing director Derek Llambias, who insists changes to the disciplinary process are now essential.

 

The Toon chief also questioned Wigan chairman Dave Whelan’s claim that the challenge was “fair”.

 

He said in a statement: “We are disappointed to learn that the FA is not going to charge the Wigan player.

 

“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.”

 

In relation to Whelan’s remarks, Llambias added: “I have the greatest respect for Dave, who has been in the game for a long time as a professional footballer and now owner.

 

"I am also aware that Dave’s career was cut short due to injury.

 

“I am therefore disappointed and surprised by the comments he made yesterday, 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.

 

“It was not a fair challenge. This view is shared by countless former players, referees and well-respected media commentators. Indeed it appears to be only Dave Whelan who takes a contrary view.”

 

 

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4849912/Callum-McManaman-to-escape-punishment.html#ixzz2O0NPfzFh

[Guest icemanblue]

I think it's a typo, it was meant to say 'cunt'.

[Rebellious]

I think it's a typo, it was meant to say 'cunt'.

 

 

:lol:

[Yorkie]

The reasoning behind them not taking action is complete bullshit.

 

The linesman didn't see the incident in its entirety. Surely, that should be reason enough to revert to replays?

 

They want to avoid 're-refereeing' so as not to belittle referees on the pitch in future. But when the ineptitude is as frequent as it currently is, it renders the whole 'respect the refs' campaign pretty pointless, because they haven't earned anyone's respect.

 

You can't help but think that if the victim of the challenge was a more high-profile player, the FA would have a different viewpoint.

[Heake]

If the reasoning behind the FA ruling is not to allow retrospective reffing, then why have an appeals system for red card repealls?

 

Which is retrospective reffereeing

[Benwell Lad]

Disgusting, who cares if the ref saw it, its a fucking disgusting challenge. We all know if it was Rooney etc then they'd be an uproar, I hope the club sues the FA and Wigan for it, utterly disgusted.

 

Nothing in the FA statement would assist their defence if Newcastle did go down a legal compensation route. I think they owe it to Haidara to ensure that justice prevails, now that the FA have failed in their duty.

[AlanSkÃrare]

What the fucking fuck?

 

The FA can suck a dick.

[Guest Phil K]

You can't help but think that if the victim of the challenge was a more high-profile player, the FA would have a different viewpoint.

Or if the injured player was from Man U/Liverpool/certain London clubs - the usual suspects in fact ?

[Wullie]

Carver charged.

[cp40]

Carver charged with misconduct by FA

[Adam]

Carver charged with misconduct, standard. Fucking piss take

[eliassenfredrik]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9gC1GiSDDA

[jdckelly]

the cheek of them, the pure cheek

[Yorkie]

 

Jesus.

[nufcjb]

Carver now charged..

[cp40]

the FA have it in for either us or Ashley and are going for it here like.

[Decky]

Carver punished. Unbelievable.

[Spider Jerusalem]

Utter fucking joke. 

[Dokko]

Utter cunts.

[cp40]

so the FA asked Dave Whelan to decide what happend after sunday?

[54]

Just seen this, what a fucking disgrace the FA are, as others have said if this was one of the media favorites who had got injured then there would have been a serious ban. The club statement puts out a strong message, one I agree with 100%, lets hope the club sticks by there word.

[thenige]

Could this be taken to criminal court instead then? Someone watching TV like that guy who 'reported' Terry for the racist remark? Surely it's pretty close to GBH no? Absolutely ridiculous decision from the FA. Embarrassing beyond belief.