Liverpool legend Dietmar Hamann has urged the FA to throw the book at Alan Pardew after after the Newcastle boss insulted Manchester City manager Manuel Pellegrini during yesterdays' controversial 2-0 defeat at St. James' Park.
After Cheik Tiote's laughably disallowed goal, Cameras captured Pardew calling Pellegrini a “f******g old c**t” during a row on the touchline.
Newcastle were 1-0 down at the time, and looking at Tiote's goal - which could've conceivably changed the pattern of the game - it's obvious why Pardew felt so enraged:
Analysing the game on Sky Sports, Dietmar Hamann argued that Newcastle had been 'done' by poor refereeing, and insisted that 'the goal should have been given 100 per cent'. However, although 'frustrated' Pardew apologised for his 'heat of the moment' comments after the game, Hamann he offered no sympathy for the Newcastle boss over his rant. He tweeted:
"The FA have got to come down hard on Alan Pardew. Unacceptable behaviour towards a fellow colleague. What happened to the Respect campaign?"
Given the heightened emotion of the moment, Pardew should be forgive for his outburst (IMO) as the breathtaking incompetence of Premier League referees and linesmen is enough to send anyone round the bend. Additionally, that kind of swearing happens regularly on the field (it's much more evident when you watch a game live), and the FA don't seem to be in any rush to stamp that out.
As for the Tiote's decision - the decision to disallow it simply the latest in a long-line of ridiculous refereeing decisions this season. It brings to mind Liverpool's disallowed goal against Arsenal in November, when Martin Atkinson ruled out a perfectly fair Reds goal at a time when it would've made a huge difference to the game.
It's an ongoing problem, and it simply amazes me that referees are not held more accountable for their decisions. In my view, after every game, refs should - at the very least - *publicly* publish justifications for major decisions.
It's also irritating how referees cannot be criticised by managers. Whatever happened to freedom of speech? I can't wait for the day when a manager is charged by the FA for attacking a ref, and decides to challenge the decision in the courts. How can stating an opinion, or oftentimes, a fact, be outlawed?
Author: Jaimie K
After Cheik Tiote's laughably disallowed goal, Cameras captured Pardew calling Pellegrini a “f******g old c**t” during a row on the touchline.
Newcastle were 1-0 down at the time, and looking at Tiote's goal - which could've conceivably changed the pattern of the game - it's obvious why Pardew felt so enraged:
Analysing the game on Sky Sports, Dietmar Hamann argued that Newcastle had been 'done' by poor refereeing, and insisted that 'the goal should have been given 100 per cent'. However, although 'frustrated' Pardew apologised for his 'heat of the moment' comments after the game, Hamann he offered no sympathy for the Newcastle boss over his rant. He tweeted:
"The FA have got to come down hard on Alan Pardew. Unacceptable behaviour towards a fellow colleague. What happened to the Respect campaign?"
Given the heightened emotion of the moment, Pardew should be forgive for his outburst (IMO) as the breathtaking incompetence of Premier League referees and linesmen is enough to send anyone round the bend. Additionally, that kind of swearing happens regularly on the field (it's much more evident when you watch a game live), and the FA don't seem to be in any rush to stamp that out.
As for the Tiote's decision - the decision to disallow it simply the latest in a long-line of ridiculous refereeing decisions this season. It brings to mind Liverpool's disallowed goal against Arsenal in November, when Martin Atkinson ruled out a perfectly fair Reds goal at a time when it would've made a huge difference to the game.
It's an ongoing problem, and it simply amazes me that referees are not held more accountable for their decisions. In my view, after every game, refs should - at the very least - *publicly* publish justifications for major decisions.
It's also irritating how referees cannot be criticised by managers. Whatever happened to freedom of speech? I can't wait for the day when a manager is charged by the FA for attacking a ref, and decides to challenge the decision in the courts. How can stating an opinion, or oftentimes, a fact, be outlawed?
Author: Jaimie K
Because the FA's munted that's why.
ReplyDeleteI'll tell you why this decision was extraordinary. This wasn't a split second moment for the referee to make a judgement. The 2 officials took their time to be 100% sure of the decision, yet they still got it f**king horribly wrong. Unbelievable. Throw the big thick rule book at their bloody heads.
ReplyDeleteIf Pellegrini thinks it is settled, then it should be settled. That said, Pardew repeatedly flips his wig and though he deserves credit for regularly apologising, anyone can regret a mistake. The apologies would be more meaningful if he would cut this stuff out. showing he'd learned his lesson.
ReplyDeleteIt is ludicrous how managers are constantly fined and/or banned by the league for questioning the competency of referees. Fair enough if a manager starts throwing around accusations of a ref being bribed or what have you, but simply questioning decisions should not result in punishment- especially since the refs aren't at all accountable for their performances.
It is a tough job, but they don't deserve this complete protection and isolation. If they make a contentious call, let them explain it.
The whole sad episode screams for video review of questionable goal decisions. It wouldn't interrupt the flow of the game as it is stopped momentarily anyway and the correct decision would be the result. I also like the idea I read from a commenter on this site that refs should have to compete to be EPL refs on a continual basis. If you aren't up to snuff, then you are relegated to lower leagues at the end of the season just like the bottom three teams.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you shut your mouth, Hamman, no-one is interested in you stupid opinion!
ReplyDelete__
ReplyDeleteTotally Agree!
The incompetence of the FA is clear for everyone to see, the world over!
It is time that another adjudicating organisation replaced the outdated, incompetent FA.
Just look at the clout the G14 have; They can move FIFA so what resistance would these FA clowns pose ?
The FA are the running joke in football!
Its high time people stopped laughing at the joke and changed the stage!
Pardew is a hypocrite. Two faced lowlife
ReplyDeleteCan it not be argued that the 3 passive offside Newcastle players were interfering with the goal keeper?
ReplyDeleteI can totally understand why pardew blew his top with a perfectly good goal being disallowed which may have changed the game in favour of the mags but it was the reff at fault not pellegrini and should not of said what he did, but yet another very poor decision made, I think the first step should be to make it compulsory for all reffs to do a post match interview then they can explain their decisions on the game, at least it would put them in the spotlight like the managers are
ReplyDeleteYou can misguidedly argue that if you want, sure.
ReplyDeleteIt was one of the most awful decisions I've seen. The changes to the offside rule were made so goals like that could stand. Under the circs I think Pardew should be forgiven for going a bit mental. He's also since apologized, though not so the ref & his incompetent sidekick.
ReplyDeleteOk thanks, I'll also misguidedly argue tt you know anything about football
ReplyDeletePeter I think the three Man city defenders were interfering with Harts vision more than the Newcastle players, that said Negredo is one hell of a player and played well and deserved his goal and Man City played very well for their victory. We had a chance to equalise and improve our game, but we can't if the ref makes such a ridiculous mistake which impacted heavily on the morale of the Newcastle players, shame spoilt a great game.
ReplyDeleteI think Pardew is a wind-up merchant. Does anybody remember when he danced along the touchline to incite Wenger when he was at West Ham?
ReplyDeleteI also vividly recall a certain Cup Final where his left back tried to cross the ball, only for it to float in the far corner of the goal. Rather than accept the freak nature of the goal, he couldn't help himself but to turn to the opposition fans and say "Ha Ha Ha" at them.
I think his team were done by a last minute 40-yard equaliser, so "Ha Ha Ha" back at ya...... ;)
Sammy Lee lying on the floor at Wembley, anyone? Passive offside, but the goal was given.
ReplyDeleteHe can be forgiven for flipping his lid, but not for the personal abuse dished out to Pellegrini. He crossed the line there.
ReplyDeleteIt was a bit bad & mad but I side with JK here & think Pards should be forgiven. The decision was so heartbreakingly bad that a red mist descended...
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying i'm right, i'm just putting it out there. There were 3 players at were in offside positions, i know that none of them touched the ball, but i'm just arguing that they could have affected the GKs view.
ReplyDeleteClearly Pardew should act as an example to kids and what he did, even as an act of frustration, should be punished with a ten match ban. Biting, cursing it's all the same playground antics. Of course this will not happen. Pardew is English and Ingurlanders are above being punished. It's probably that foreign manager's own fault that this happened.
ReplyDeleteIs Didi becoming a 'go to guy' for the voice of reason which I disagree with on this occasion or is some of Alan Smith's drab personality rubbing off on him? I sincerely hope it's not the latter.
ReplyDeleteWatch the video. Pellegrini was the first to say something to Pardew. Yes it was an over reaction to what Pellegrini said but maybe he should have shut his mouth in the first place.
ReplyDeleteWhat does Cameron have to say?? Is he outraged? Does he think that Pardew is setting a horrible example for children??? This clearly ageist abuse!
ReplyDeleteThe FA are a joke, really they should be placing some sort of punishment on Pardew if they want to demonstrate any semblance of integrity, consistancy, credibility. But no, it's done on the fly, they cater to a certain crowd. A "white" South American says a word with culturual nuance, it is pronounced racist 8 game ban. A black frenchman makes a gesture with cultural nuance, associated with hate for an ethnic/religious group, they dilly dally, and at the end of the day,probably won't do anything, an englishman gets 4 games for clear "racial" abuse. Suarez makes a gesture to Fulham, gets 1 game, Wilshire makes a gesture, gets 2 games. Where do they stand? It is obvious that they discriminate based on the "who" rather than the "what".
Some coaches question referees decisions and get fined, others don't. It's a joke,
Ideally, they would apply their rules equally and fairly, but they don't. Given Rodgers and Moyes are getting fined for things said, Pardew should get a fine too, for lack of professionalism - it's not like he just got elbowed in the head, or was on the receiving end of a hard tackle like the players. He's in a suit and should act accordingly.
In my opinion, this should be a fine, it is after all live telvised for millions, and this is not a good example. All the "racist" BS by Suarez, Terry, Anelka, should be 3 games and a fine - a warning with sufficient consequences, which would stamp out naive/ignorant behaviours - not so much malicious ones. Violent conduct should be dealt with based on severity, not how many tweets are said about an event or how many prime ministers have opinions on it.
They
The FA learn to make all those rule from the north korean,that's why.
ReplyDeletewe should boycotts FA.. So overseas ppl should stop watching english game...hahahaaa no more BPL FA or CC
ReplyDeleteSorry mate, be as condecending as you like, that doesnt make you correct. The official rule states
ReplyDeleteLAW 11: OFFSIDE
A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:
- interfering with play or
- interfering with an opponent or
- gaining an advantage by being in that position
Interfering with play is fairly open to opinion and subjective.
One of the NC players has to duck out of the way of the oncoming ball, therefore it could be argued that he was interfering with play, especially by an official on the other side of the field. Now, I said that I don't claim that I am right, but i am putting forward another opinion to yours so you should accept that not everyone sees it the same as you.
I also agree with JK that it's irritating that managers can't criticize refs. I see the Stoke chairman came out with strong criticisms of ref & linesman over the not given handball by Sterling & soft pen decision. As the chairmen can't be fined perhaps this is a way forward in publicly criticizing poor refs for crap decisions.
ReplyDeleteIt's high time to introduce a relegation system to referees and lines men. If that's the case the dude who made Sterling's offside call in city game would be straight into football conference
ReplyDelete"ref's opinion" being at issue here. The linesman must first admit that he wasn't in a posiiton to see clearly...which is why he has to give an 'opinion.' This is more confirmation that a video review of controversial goal decisions is needed. The linesman's 'opinion' is irrelevant when reviewing the video because the pure physics of the encounter prove there was no possible interference from any NC player. None were in direct line of sight to the ball. Those were all City players. So the linesman's opinion is nothing more than a 'guess'...which should not be weighted more than video 'evidence' to the contrary.
ReplyDeleteSure, another example of a terrible decision.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with what you are saying about video decisions, all I am saying is that at full speed from the other side of the pitch the linemans decision may have been fully justified. He might have though that he was 100% correct. Every makes mistakes at work, are you perfect? Anyway, if it was a disallowed Liverpool goal I would be arguing the same as you :)
ReplyDeleteExactly...the only thing that remains is for the linesman to admit that he doesn't have a definitive view and to then call for a video review which was available and shown to the general public before the ref and the linesman were finished 'consulting' and arriving at exactly the wrong decision. And the Linesman off-side call agains RS in the City match was a disallowed goal that easily could have been correctly judged by video.
ReplyDelete