SUNDERLAND v MANCHESTER CITY - Luckless Black Cats
Saturday 12 April 2008
Manchester City boss Sven Goran Eriksson is in danger of giving managers a good name for their sporting honesty after admitting that his team were rather fortunate to come away from Sunderland with all three points. The former England coach accepted: “We were lucky. There was contact for the penalty but it was still a bit harsh.” We actually doubt there was any contact at all when Nyron Nosworthy challenged Daniel Sturridge and don’t think a penalty should have been awarded. We definitely think there was contact when Richard Dunne nearly took the shirt off Kenwyne Jones’ back and almost throttled Michael Chopra into the bargain. So the penalty award goes in the direction of the Black Cats.
The Right Result is a 2-1 win for Sunderland.
Entry Filed under: Latest Incidents
5 Comments Add your own
1. Safcref | April 14th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Iam a sunderland and I agree there was no contact for the penalty, not quite sure about the Kenwyne jones bit. But I have a few quick questions for the people who reviewed the tape.
When you reviewed the tap…..
1)How many times did you have to watch it?
2)How many angles did you watch it from?
3)How slow was the tape going when you relised there was no contact.
4)How long did you have to make your desicion.
2. Safcref | April 14th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
If I was Mike Riley my answers would look a bit like this.
1)I only saw the incident once.
2)I only had one angle to see it from
3)I saw the incident in real time.
4)I had maximum time of a second to give my desicion.
3. steve | April 14th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Safcref - refreshing to hear comments like your in the wake of a defeat!!
Also as a city fan, i am not the biggest supporter of your Manager (for obvious reasons!!) however he also has conducted himself very well this season!!
between the two teams, we really are showing the likes of Wenger/Grant/Fergason et al how it should be done!!
i hope you guys stay up and kick on again next season!!
CTID!!!
4. Safcref | April 14th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Thanks it was a good game!
5. SAFC Chris | April 15th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
You doubt there was any contact. Not good enough. The premise of your whole site can only work with questions of fact or obviously incorrect interpretations of the laws of the game, not opinion. Also since when did being a football statiticians make you an expert in the laws of the game.
The actual problem with this incident is not so much Mike Riley as the fools at FIFA who re-wrote Law 12, and left refs with no discretion, other than for hand-ball, to judge intent. I would suggest - and even this is opinion - that Nosworthy did not intend to foul. Under the old Law 12 it would have been no penalty. Under the “new” one the ref has no discretion if he thinks there’s contact. You cannot attack Riley unless you can do so on a factual basis.
The ame fools have also cocked up the law on offside, such that you need a degree in jurisprudence to interpret it. Target the real fools in all this - FIFA.
P.S. whatever our lot think, we are in the position in the league we deserve to be in, as you make your own luck.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed