Wednesday, 23 September 2009

More on Bellamy

If you're not bored of it yet you can read Danny Puglsey and I discussing the issue over at Republik of Mancunia. Check it out here.

10 comments:

Culla said...

was going to reply to this on the 'Republik' page but couldn't bring myself to! every transgression should now be dealt with properly, as the frequency and severity of the incidents are getting much worse and the fan-player relationship is deteriorating fast. bellamy should have been banned. ferguson and neville should also get at least touchline bans for their puerile celebrations

OxfordBlue said...

Your restraint was admirable under such severe provocation. some of the stuff being spouted was complete one-eyed garbage and drowned out your reasonable points in agreeing that Bellamy was out of order; did not need to do what he did etc whilst there was little agreement from the Red side about anything...

ChrisR said...

Did you bother to read the linked article on "City Receive Favourable Treatment Again Whilst FA Do United… Again" ?!?!?
Stupid one-eyed tossers

trinder said...

There was some fascinating stuff in The Times yesterday on Bellamy's generosity and commitment to a football project in Sierra Leone
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/owen_slot/article6843814.ece

Scott said...

Chris R - was there anything in that article that wasn't true?

Is it not true that Christian Negouai was fined £2k and received no ban for missing a drugs test around the same time the FA fined Rio Ferdinand £50k and an eight month ban?

Is it not true that Robbie Fowler scored a late goal against United and celebrated in front of our travelling fans, holding up his five digits to represent Liverpool’s success in Europe and received no punishment, then a week later, Gary Neville celebrated in front of Liverpool’s travelling fans following a late goal and was fined £5k?

If you can give me like for like situations where the FA have punished an opposing team's player more harshly than they have ours for committing exactly the same offence, please do enlighten me. Or is the truth that there aren't any of those cases and I'm not actually one-eyed at all?

Chas said...

Scott, I strongly suspect rational explanations won’t penetrate your thick red blinkers, but here goes. Fowler did what every footballer who scores a goal in any game does, he celebrated his goal, at the end where he scored, which all footballers are entitled to do. Both Neville and Adebayor ran the length of the pitch to celebrate in front of the away supporters, which is why they both rightfully got into trouble. But Neville took this a stage further last Sunday by doing pretty much the same thing when he neither scored nor was playing. He gets off with just a warning, while Adebayor is charged, no doubt somehow you will see this as bias against Neville.
As for the drugs thing, here’s an independent assessment of that, but again I doubt it will penetrate your myopia:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/m/man_utd/3220561.stm

Richard said...

Jack,
will you please stop justifying the provocative, aggressive (not to mention foul-mouthed) bloggers at Rep. of Manc. by giving them your attention. I found it difficult enough to read your 'interview' last week before the game: you showed considerable restraint in answering those questions, but i feel that not rising is almost tacit agreement. For example, when discussing the City versions of the Adebayor chant, why not mention United's Park chant (you know the one)? You didnt have to say 'you're as bad as us', rather, you could have said something like 'a minority don't reflect the views of the rest of the fans, as I'm sure you can appreciate when United fans sing about Park...'

Scott is a wind-up merchant (how many interviews end with the interviewer having tha last word?!) and I'm afraid even rising above it is justifying him.

So yes, I would appreciate it if you would stop writing for him.

Until we stuff them at Eastlands.

Scott said...

Chas - Gary Neville did not run the length of the pitch. He ran about 20 yards. He was stood in our half when the free-kick was taken (as he always does. Neville does not go up for our corners/freekicks) and he didn't run to the byline, just the direction of the away corner.

Regardless, Neville's charge was for "improper conduct". Is it only improper to incite fans if you've run over to them? Fowler's celebration was purely to incite the away fans behind the goal - how is that any more or less proper than Neville inciting Liverpool fans?

As for your article, as an independent assessment, it's pretty rubbish. I mean, to claim that because a player doesn't speak hardly any English, it means it's OK he didn't take a drugs test? Then it claims the FA were taking a hard line on drug tests after that case, so why did Mutu receive a lesser punishment than Rio just a few months after Rio was banned? He was banned for 7 months and fined £20k. How does that make sense then? What a hopeless article.

Adam said...

I must ask what the point was for that amateur blogger ( it was horribly written not because it was red but because the author has zero idea how to form a proper sentence and just resorts to swearing) asking for a City opinion when it was clear the whole point of the exercise was for the interviewer to put his own agenda across. Boring and pointless and if I were you Blue Bloggers I wouldn't bother in future.

Stephen said...

Jack,
Are you happy with the way that article turned out? Blinkered, vicious questions with a persistant raison d'etre to compare Bellamy's actions to Cantona's. I'm actually fumbling for words here.
Scott most definately carries an oversized chip on his shoulder and, for what it's worth, should be avoided for future articles.....for your reader's sake. Surely there is a more level headed red out there willing to give us a more considered opinion.
Reading Scott's ramblings certainly add more than a touch of irony to the old "Bertie" tag.....