|
|
Post by admiral on Jan 28, 2015 8:13:57 GMT
To my viewing neither Adam's on Giroud, last March, nor Costa's last night were deliberate.
Wonder if the southern softy media will be howling for Costa to be banned.
What will the FA do?
|
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 28, 2015 8:16:54 GMT
Don't see him getting banned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 8:28:35 GMT
The first one was 100% deliberate, he has to be charged.
|
|
jamerg
Youth Player
Posts: 441
|
Post by jamerg on Jan 28, 2015 8:30:18 GMT
Second one looked deliberate to me too - he has a little look down, and then instead of lifting his left leg up he brings it down.
|
|
|
|
Post by 2004 on Jan 28, 2015 8:30:53 GMT
It really shows that every player that plays against him despise him. That first one was deliberate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Jan 28, 2015 9:26:33 GMT
Just read the headline, he doesn't, so wont be.
|
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 28, 2015 9:38:23 GMT
Second one looked deliberate to me too - he has a little look down, and then instead of lifting his left leg up he brings it down. Second was very similar to Adam's. It was deliberate. It's going to be very interesting to see what happens. I'd be surprised if he wasn't banned. |
|
|
|
Post by philb on Jan 28, 2015 9:42:45 GMT
They banned Adam so the same should apply to Costa coffee. Probably won't though as Mourwhingio will have a hissy fit!
|
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 28, 2015 9:54:58 GMT
If he doesn't get banned for the stamp on Skyrtle then the FA need Interpol to examine them for corruption. I thought Adams's stamp was deliberate, and Costa's was worse.
OS.
|
|
|
|
Post by admiral on Jan 28, 2015 10:06:38 GMT
If he doesn't get banned for the stamp on Skyrtle then the FA need Interpol to examine them for corruption. I thought Adams's stamp was deliberate, and Costa's was worse. OS. Thank goodness for different opinions. Personally I thought neither were deliberate but the key point is they were pretty much exactly the same. The FA considered the footage and Adam got banned. Will they do the same for Costa? It will be interesting to see if they do. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 11:24:56 GMT
If there is any consistency then he has to be banned, the first was deliberate.
|
|
|
|
Post by lostinafrenchbar on Jan 28, 2015 11:32:35 GMT
The man we all love to hate. Gotta have a villain haven't we? He should come onto the pitch with a top hat and a long black moustache. Total cunt, mind you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 12:10:10 GMT
Both were defo deliberate IMHO and as such he should be banned but he won't because he plays for a big club and the fact that Oliver is a shithouse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 28, 2015 12:29:59 GMT
For what it's worth, Dermot Gallagher has just said on Sky, that he thinks the second one was an accident but that the first one needs looking at.
|
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Jan 28, 2015 14:00:54 GMT
For what it's worth, Dermot Gallagher has just said on Sky, that he thinks the second one was an accident but that the first one needs looking at. To deconstruct that statement, it means Costa, being a London club player, should only be banned for 3 matches but not for any extra games! Gallagher is only there on Sky as an apologist for the F.A. Establishment! |
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Jan 28, 2015 15:13:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Jan 28, 2015 16:38:41 GMT
The man we all love to hate. Gotta have a villain haven't we? He should come onto the pitch with a top hat and a long black moustache. Total cunt, mind you. His coffee is shit and overpriced as well. Stamping on players is controversial enough but £3.50 for a fucking latte is daylight robbery  |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jan 28, 2015 16:42:27 GMT
To my viewing neither Adam's on Giroud, last March, nor Costa's last night were deliberate. Wonder if the southern softy media will be howling for Costa to be banned. What will the FA do? My money's on fa. |
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on Jan 28, 2015 17:29:25 GMT
Second one looked deliberate to me too - he has a little look down, and then instead of lifting his left leg up he brings it down. Second was very similar to Adam's. It was deliberate. It's going to be very interesting to see what happens. I'd be surprised if he wasn't banned. Just been charged apparently. |
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Jan 28, 2015 17:35:03 GMT
Second was very similar to Adam's. It was deliberate. It's going to be very interesting to see what happens. I'd be surprised if he wasn't banned. Just been charged apparently. But only for one stamp! Apparently, if you play for a big club, you get a 50% discount for stamping! |
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on Jan 28, 2015 17:39:10 GMT
Just been charged apparently. But only for one stamp! Apparently, if you play for a big club, you get a 50% discount for stamping! Fuckin stinks mate.The second stamp was identical to Adam on Giroud,that resulted in a three game ban. |
|
|
|
Post by ianstokie on Jan 28, 2015 18:26:39 GMT
I always thought Adam's was deliberate, but it was never a "stamp" only a "tread". Much less vicious.
Costa really is quite despicable though. Someone remind me where he hails from?
|
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Jan 30, 2015 14:54:38 GMT
3 match ban including Chelsea v Villa and Everton!  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2015 15:28:24 GMT
Adam got a 3 match ban so Costa should've got an extra game for the frivolous appeal, or 6 for the fact he did 2 stamps in the same match.
At least justice has been served, hopefully it'll Costa Chelsea the title.
|
|
|
|
Post by shrewspotter on Jan 30, 2015 15:43:07 GMT
only my opinion but I thought Adam's was naughty, I know he plays for us but he is a bit naughty like that and I have to be honest and say I thought Adam deserved his ban, as for Costa the first one yes, deffo ban, the second not so sure about..........I know you won't agree but I think the FA have got it about right, do agree though that perhaps the ban should have been extended after the appeal by a further game
|
|
|
|
Post by tracksuittony on Jan 30, 2015 15:46:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by hartzchoco on Jan 30, 2015 15:50:16 GMT
only my opinion but I thought Adam's was naughty, I know he plays for us but he is a bit naughty like that and I have to be honest and say I thought Adam deserved his ban, as for Costa the first one yes, deffo ban, the second not so sure about..........I know you won't agree but I think the FA have got it about right, do agree though that perhaps the ban should have been extended after the appeal by a further game Charlie does play a little naughty, and I love him for it. Costa, on the other hand, is just a complete fucking prick. |
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on Jan 30, 2015 16:04:56 GMT
only my opinion but I thought Adam's was naughty, I know he plays for us but he is a bit naughty like that and I have to be honest and say I thought Adam deserved his ban, as for Costa the first one yes, deffo ban, the second not so sure about..........I know you won't agree but I think the FA have got it about right, do agree though that perhaps the ban should have been extended after the appeal by a further game The second was no different to the stamp by Adam in any way,why are you unsure? |
|
|
|
Post by adamsson on Jan 30, 2015 16:29:10 GMT
If you don't want to get stepped on stop rolling around on the flour and yes Giroud I do mean you  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2015 16:31:46 GMT
given the fact that we appealed the Adam ban and got no extra game ban for the frivolous appeal, why is everyone using Adam's as an example yet saying Costa SHOULD get the extra game ban for a frivolous appeal???? aaah....my mistake, completely forgot about "Oatcake inconsistency"  |
|
