No fecking way McManaman wasn't trying to hit the lad hard there, no excuse for that. He knows what he was doing, if you want an example of excessive force there it is.
Callum McManaman
- Thread starter noodlehair
- Start date
I was trying to find an excuse for why the FA didn't punish him, even though it may have looked like as if I was trying to defend him so to speak.
Its a clear red and 3 game ban, FA proving imcompetant again. Mcmanaman just needs to get his head down and crack on
If the group enforcing the rules of the game does not, you have no choice but to do so yourself.
Or the players will end up doing it themselves.
This sort of loophole cannot remain. A lawsuit puts more pressure on the FA. It's the smart thing to do.
Nah, I'd rather keep the legal system out of sport unless absolutely necessary. In my opinion this isn't one of those times, but it's a grey area that everyone will see it differently.
Not remotely a grey area. You want this situation to be punished or not.
Right now it won't without legal action or players taking it into their own hands.
He touches the ball so certainly gets somewhere near it.
Shocker of a tackle and red no doubt ball or not nowadays, but suing him jesus.
Might as well make this game non contact and be done with it.
It is a grey area. What if someone gently trips me up within the normal course of a match and I tear all my knee ligaments upon landing and never play again? Should I take legal action?
It all comes down to the level of intent, negligence and danger of a challenge. Which is sliding scale however you view this particular incident.
No, and it's obvious why.
If a guy stabs you in the head, do you think it's the same as dying in a car accident?
No, why?
That's the difference because NUFC probably feels they've been failed by the governing bodies who were supposed to punish Mc Manaman.They lose a player due to a reckless tackle and the attacker gets nothing ?? Say nothing happen to Mc Manaman and they play a rematch next season, don't you think there is a possibility he might be himself a target of vicious tackles if the Newcastle players feel he got off with nothing ?
It is crazy to think this sort of stuff can go unpunished in football, truly the rules were written by dinosaurs who have never played it.
Another clear cut case where instant video review should be required.
Referee X suspects but is not sure whether a red card offense occurred. The fourth official immediately reviews the incident on video. The verdict is rendered within seconds. Red card issued. Case closed.
Anyone who doubts this was a foul needs psychiatric help immediately.
This is not rocket science, amigos.
Referee X suspects but is not sure whether a red card offense occurred. The fourth official immediately reviews the incident on video. The verdict is rendered within seconds. Red card issued. Case closed.
Anyone who doubts this was a foul needs psychiatric help immediately.
This is not rocket science, amigos.
Because one had intent to kill and the other was an accident.
Which would be the difference between your two instances.
McManaman is either a horrible, clueless football player or there was intent. Either way, he should be punished. If the FA isn't going to do it, it should be handled by the club through legal action, as was done to Newcastle a couple of years ago for a similar challenge.
Well, if there was intent, then he should receive a very lengthy ban in that case. If it was a mis-timed challenge then, there should be a clear 3-match ban. I remember Roy Keane's challenge on Alf Inge Haaland a few years ago, and although he wasn't clearly injured, it was a pre-meditated challenge so, there was intent to do some damage and he only got a 5-game ban when in reality he should have got a a great deal longer. Hopefully McManaman will learn from this because he could be on the receiving end of a bad challenge one of these days.
The only reason the thug touches the ball is because the Newcastle lad touches it onto the underside of McManaman's boot as it sails over the ball and into Haidara's leg.
Only a numptie would assume we are talking about legal action for every contact but if the FA, who do have the authority to deal with this, won't then it's down to the player and his club. This player's contract may well have clauses in it saying the more he plays the more he's paid so McManaman has fecked that up for him as he has any payments Haidara would have got for playing for France.
I shout every week football is a contact sport and officials are being conned left right and centre by fairies rolling around due a broken finger nail or a hair out of place...FFS this is nothing like that, it's a blatant assault.
The FA explain the non re-refereeing rule...
http://www1.skysports.com/watch/vid...wcastle-united/8578005/fa-no-mcmanaman-charge
And an interesting article from the Mirror...
In recent years there has been a series of bad tackles by Newcastle players on opponents that have left a bad taste in the mouth.
This season alone, Fabricio Coloccini stamped on the side of Luis Suarez's knee. Cheick Tiote caught Steve Fletcher high up his shin in the derby match with Sunderland. Five years ago Kevin Nolan broke Victor Anichebe's leg and was hit by legal action from his opponent.
All unsavoury moments that probably made even the most partisan Newcastle fan wince.
The sad fact is that bad tackles (I prefer to regard them as assaults, because their violence and potential to injure is far greater than a standard tackle) happen in the game.
The speed, aggression, over-commitment and hot-headed atmosphere of games - and some players - will always combine to produce the odd shocker like McManaman's on Haidara.
We all wish they didn't, and that professional footballers would do more to stop themselves from stepping over the line.
The incidents involving Newcastle players cited above have one thing in common. All were punished with a red card. The players were banned for three games. Punishment was handed out and duly taken.
What makes McManaman's case so absurd is that he has got off with one of the worst high tackles in Premier League history. He's free to play in key relegation games against Norwich and QPR. Free to play at Wembley in an FA Cup semi final.
Personally McManaman will still pay a heavy price. His young career (and what a talent his is when doing the right things on the pitch) will now be blighted by that tackle. He'll be jeered and booed around the country.
Nothing compared to the pain and anguish of tearful Haidara as he frets about his career and his season, mind.
Newcastle are correct to speak out forcefully on the inept FA rules that have conspired to let McManaman off the hook.
Mark Halsey was unfortunate in having his view blocked just at the moment of the tackle. He admits it was a red card and has apologised to Alan Pardew.
No such excuse for the assistant referee who, TV images showed, was looking straight at the incident and didn't have the bottle to flag for the foul.
The timidity of assistant refs, and their reluctance to independently give a decision, is becoming a joke. Even for simple throw in decisions, most look at the ref first before flagging these days.
And that was the problem here. The assistant ref reported that he saw the tackle, did nothing, didn't realise how bad it was, and so by the FA rules - voted for by a casting majority of football clubs, it must be stressed - they cannot "re-referee" the game and issue retrospective punishment.
The FA dithered for two days over their decision clearly knowing it would represent a major PR own goal. And it is.
A common sense approach would be for the FA fudge the assistant referee's evidence, say he hadn't seen it fully, and charge McManaman. Then everyone, apart from Wigan, their increasingly ludicrous owner Dave Whelan, and McManaman, is happy.
John Carver, Newcastle's assistant boss HAS been charged by the FA for his protests at half time, and is the only man likely to come out of this incident with a ban!
Meanwhile we await an update on Haidara's condition. He is the victim here. He has been hugely impressive since joining Newcastle in January and looks a massive talent.
He is quick, good on the ball and extremely fit. Let's hope he quickly regains all those qualities when he returns to action.
It was a horrible, horrible tackle, and he should be banned heavily for this. However, I am not certain that there was intent, I think only the player can tell us whether there was or not. These incidents happen so quickly on the football pitch, his boot could have been raised thinking he had more time before the player came towards him, he could have simply mis-timed the tackle.
These tackles fly in very quickly, and we analyse slow motion footage trying to pick out intent from it, wheras I have played Sunday League and I've accidently planted tackles like this but by the time I've realised I'm going to hit the player, it's too late and you have to hold your hands up and apologise for a terrible tackle.
As for retrospective action, if the linesman claimed to have seen it, he should now get a heavy ban and a fine for failing to act on it... but of course, this will never happen.
These tackles fly in very quickly, and we analyse slow motion footage trying to pick out intent from it, wheras I have played Sunday League and I've accidently planted tackles like this but by the time I've realised I'm going to hit the player, it's too late and you have to hold your hands up and apologise for a terrible tackle.
As for retrospective action, if the linesman claimed to have seen it, he should now get a heavy ban and a fine for failing to act on it... but of course, this will never happen.
A ball that high should really be dealt with from a standing tackle. The chances of something like that ending in tears is high enough that even attempting the tackle should be considered a sign of intent.
But in life, there are many more ways to die than being stabbed in the head or being involved in a car accident. All with different degrees of culpability.
In my example, the bloke gently tipped me up on purpose. Now what?
It's a grey area, or rather a full spectrum, no matter how much you want your opinions to be the binary code.
I don't think McManaman had any intent to injure - it should've been a red for "excessive force". And note that there's an adjective before "force", implying there's a possible range - How much force should trigger legal action?
No way in hell did linesman Matthew Wilkes not see what happened but I guess it was yet another linesman doing feck all in a game.
For that incident, the police were going to get involved so the FA went with the ban.
He's from Huyton a nasty sink estate in Liverpool which also brought us Joey Barton and Gerrard.
They don't call it Huyton "two dogs fightin" for nothing.
They don't call it Huyton "two dogs fightin" for nothing.
After further review, I think I can say that this is the worst challenge I have ever seen. That bad. Ever so slightly worse than the ridiculous Keane challenge on Haaland.
Worse than Keane's? No way 
Keane showed the most obvious intent going.
But yeah, it's pretty bad.
Keane showed the most obvious intent going.But yeah, it's pretty bad.
Worse than Keane's? No way
But yeah, it's pretty bad.
I suppose this one just seems more dangerous to me as firstly, Haidara's standing leg was planted wheras Haaland's wasn't, and secondly, the angle was front on, straight on the knee-cap. Both shocking though.
Worse than Keane's? No way
But yeah, it's pretty bad.
Indeed.
It is much more dangerous than Keane's tackle on Haaland, however, there was more intent on wrecking Haalands career from Keanes point of view than there was McManamans.
Haidara's injury is limited to just severe bruising, which is of course fantastic news. He's looked great so far for us.
No doubt this will be used as justification for the tackle and lack of punishment, of course.
No doubt this will be used as justification for the tackle and lack of punishment, of course.
The worst part for me was Haidara's scream on impact
That's been answered. Scroll up.
That's good news he's a lucky lad.
It's hard to believe that the linesman looked at that tackle and didn't feel the need to do anything, not even flag for a foul! You obviously can't know what was going on in McManaman's head but a professional footballer of any level should know that flying into a tackle like that is very dangerous. The FA are such feckwits, any other organisation would have found a way of applying the necessary punishment regardless of the linesman's position. McManaman was hardly going to appeal it despite what Whelan says.
Only by idiots. Everyone in the World can see he should have bene banned. The only ones that can't, unfortunately, are those capable of banning him.
Why aren't refs punished for these shocking decisions? The likes of cnut Cakir and Halsey, who have both made howlers in recent games, should be made accountable for their decisions but it seems the powers at be are too afraid to admit they have made a mistake.
Halsey didn't see it, so why exactly should he be accountable for the "decision"? He also apologized after the game for not having seen it. The situation is totally different to that of Cakir.
The reason that MaManaman isn't being punished is because it has been deemed that at least one official was the challenge. If that's the case then I think the guilty official should be demoted.
They are. They get demoted so the lower leagues have to suffer their ineptitude which in itself is stupid. It's a disgrace the way officials are protected ...this refusal to re-referee an incident suggests the FA feel the officials are beyond reproach most of the time and quite clearly they are not.
Quite what the useless Matthew Wilkes was looking at in the image above I don't know...what the feck else do they have to do but keep an eye on the game?! They rarely make decisions these days and usually wait for the ref to decide on something then they simply agree with him.
I'm not sure whether it was Wilkes who also missed the handball for Wigan's winner but beware anyone who has Matthew Wilkes as a ref or linesman.
Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore has insisted McManaman, 21, should have been charged by the FA for his challenge. Despite the incident happening in a Premier League match, the Football Association is responsible for the disciplinary procedures.
Scudamore said this should have been treated as an "exceptional case", which gives the power to reassess some incidents, even if seen by officials.
"I don't think anybody in the Premier League, perhaps bar Wigan, would have complained had they decided this was exceptional," he said.
"That's where the Premier League is on this, I don't think the rules need changing, I don't think the line needs moving.
"If they have the ability to deal with an exceptional incident, it looked to most of us that was an exceptional incident."
Shit referees should be banned from officiating because why would the lower leagues have to suffer from their mistakes ?
They are. They get demoted so the lower leagues have to suffer their ineptitude which in itself is stupid. It's a disgrace the way officials are protected ...this refusal to re-referee an incident suggests the FA feel the officials are beyond reproach most of the time and quite clearly they are not.
Quite what the useless Matthew Wilkes was looking at in the image above I don't know...what the feck else do they have to do but keep an eye on the game?! They rarely make decisions these days and usually wait for the ref to decide on something then they simply agree with him.
I'm not sure whether it was Wilkes who also missed the handball for Wigan's winner but beware anyone who has Matthew Wilkes as a ref or linesman.
Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore has insisted McManaman, 21, should have been charged by the FA for his challenge. Despite the incident happening in a Premier League match, the Football Association is responsible for the disciplinary procedures.
Scudamore said this should have been treated as an "exceptional case", which gives the power to reassess some incidents, even if seen by officials.
"I don't think anybody in the Premier League, perhaps bar Wigan, would have complained had they decided this was exceptional," he said.
"That's where the Premier League is on this, I don't think the rules need changing, I don't think the line needs moving.
"If they have the ability to deal with an exceptional incident, it looked to most of us that was an exceptional incident."
It's insanity of the highest order. I don't know if can think of another organisation that's as inept as the FA, though Uefa comes close. They even make public transport look like the pinnacle of organisational power.
Arseblog has a good article on this: http://arseblog.com/2013/03/mcmanaman-foul-awful-but-the-fa-are-the-real-villains/
And a quote from another article:
http://arseblog.com/2012/04/wolves-preview-the-fa-are-negligent-liars/
And a quote from another article:
http://arseblog.com/2012/04/wolves-preview-the-fa-are-negligent-liars/
Stupid thing is, if they banned him for 3 games, everyone would have moved on with little criticism at all.
Instead, McManaman, The FA, The referee, the linesman are just getting destroyed something surely even the idiots at the FA did not want.
Instead, McManaman, The FA, The referee, the linesman are just getting destroyed something surely even the idiots at the FA did not want.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/mar/25/mark-halsey-premier-league-callum-mcmanaman
So Mark Halsey gets dropped because his view was blocked, no word on what sort of sanction the other official (the one who actually claims he saw it but didn't deem it serious enough) will get and McManaman can go on assaulting other players' legs to his heart's content.
I'm confused. The FA take this stance where they refuse to overturn horrendous decisions because that would harm the officials' integrity but then go on to punish an official anyway, and the wrong one at that. Meanwhile the actual act still remains unpunished.
Is there any limit to the FA's incompetence and inconsistency? Don't bother answering.
So Mark Halsey gets dropped because his view was blocked, no word on what sort of sanction the other official (the one who actually claims he saw it but didn't deem it serious enough) will get and McManaman can go on assaulting other players' legs to his heart's content.
I'm confused. The FA take this stance where they refuse to overturn horrendous decisions because that would harm the officials' integrity but then go on to punish an official anyway, and the wrong one at that. Meanwhile the actual act still remains unpunished.
Is there any limit to the FA's incompetence and inconsistency? Don't bother answering.
Ridiculous.