Furious Fergie..

[Twan]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/index.html

[Peter R]

fergie full of hyperbole and crap as usual... blaming the ref for the draw...

[Bricktop]

Slurgie The Twat...

[Rockman]

For defending one of his prime players?
Time wasting and felony assault are two distinct bookable offenses.

Ah those overtime winning goals in the end(raw data recorded) are condemned.

[Rockman]

A response to the post of my fellow ite,a fan of Tevez that just happens to play for City,Bricktop.

[Karl]

Did not appear that Williams attempted to do anything other than to clear the ball. We all noticed that Williams was on the move for the ball before RVP hit the ground and followed through with continuous action into/onto kicking the ball.

[Rockman]

He admitted being aware the whistle had blown and kicking the ball out of frustration.missing his teammate head but *****ing RvP's which was nearer to the play.
I wonder if he would be that careless had it been his teammate that was closer?
In any event poor judgment is the underlining factor, and his unconcern response immediately after *****ing RvP head supports it was intended.

[Peter R]

For defending one of his prime players?
Time wasting and felony assault are two distinct bookable offenses.

Ah those overtime winning goals in the end(raw data recorded) are condemned.

..is this different than when Liverpool (and chelsea ) defend their star players? rvp should have been red carded in a heartbeat and fuggie have de nerve fi open him wine guzzling trap ?!?

[Karl]

You have put that out in a manner such that it appeared Williams claimed that he deliberately missed his teammate's head and deliberately 'took out' RVP's?

Was that really what you wished to convey Williams claimed?

[Twan]

..is this different than when Liverpool (and chelsea ) defend their star players? rvp should have been red carded in a heartbeat and fuggie have de nerve fi open him wine guzzling trap ?!?

as much as I dislike manu,and not to mention turncoat, it is Williams that should have been red carded for kicking the ball at RVP's head after the whistle was blown (by his own admission). Whether or not he was aiming for RVP is irrelevant as the outcome of his actions was kicking the ball at a player laying on the ground. Lets call a spade a spade.

[Lazie]

as much as I dislike manu,and not to mention turncoat, it is Williams that should have been red carded for kicking the ball at RVP's head after the whistle was blown (by his own admission). Whether or not he was aiming for RVP is irrelevant as the outcome of his actions was kicking the ball at a player laying on the ground. Lets call a spade a spade.

Thank you Twan.

[Rockman]

Not at all,my bad. I must have omitted something because there is a period sign and the new sentence begins with a common letter.Williams made no such claim.

When it happened I thought he kicked RvP(surely on the follow through) in the head because of its proximity to the ball,can't imagine why William would not feel the same before making the decision to deliberately rocket the ball after the whistle was blown.He had all the time in the World.
I am not too quick to dismiss the possibility that he knew what he was doing, or just didn't care either way.

You are a former ref,was there two bookable offenses?

[Karl]

It all depends on the refs opinion.
If he thought Williams was reckless i.e. with disregard for safety of RVP (...and indeed, his own teammate) deliberately hurt RVP - a card should be issued and it should be expulsion!

If he also thought that RVP should have been expelled i.e. RVP attacked Williams...albeit RVP had cause to be alarmed at what he thought was an attack on him. However regardless of any perceived severity of an attack...all players should refrain from retaliation/attacking another! = violent conduct!!!

On neither of the above described actions could a caution be given.

...on the flipside if he thought Williams had not committed an offense...then 'no card' for Williams....and RVP showed unsporting behaviour/ungentlemanly conduct then caution for RVP.

If he thought Williams committed an offense but it rose only to the level of dangerous play...then a caution would be justified.

...as I saw it RVP did not strike Williams...but had to be restrained from so doing! ...so...???

So called 'Sensible refereeing' for issuing a caution to each player?
Well the incident was defused (save for Sir Alex's 'There was an attempt to kill RVP'... in the dark!) - I have no problem with how the ref handled the matter. Reasonable person(s) could conclude the ref did well! Not Sir Alex!

[Peter R]

as much as I dislike manu,and not to mention turncoat, it is Williams that should have been red carded for kicking the ball at RVP's head after the whistle was blown (by his own admission). Whether or not he was aiming for RVP is irrelevant as the outcome of his actions was kicking the ball at a player laying on the ground. Lets call a spade a spade.

if we want to call spade spade then BOTH should be red carded and rvp an extra match ban for reacting like an idiot! that is how the laws are written .

[Mosiah]

as much as I dislike manu,and not to mention turncoat, it is Williams that should have been red carded for kicking the ball at RVP's head after the whistle was blown (by his own admission). Whether or not he was aiming for RVP is irrelevant as the outcome of his actions was kicking the ball at a player laying on the ground. Lets call a spade a spade.

Is this the first time a ball is kicked at an opponent in that fashion?

How come we didn't hear how cruel it is on those other occasions?!?