Cahill disgrace

[Beefymcfc]

After Mourinho's comments about the media having "an agenda" against Chelsea, the pundits and press seem to scared to highlight it.

No mention on MoTD. As if it never happened.

BBC were all over the Mangala incident against Everton.

And Fern's even though we see a high foot every single weekend, which would only be a yellow at best, they wanted red.

No bias though. No, no, surely not.

[Hazy2]

Cahill is maxing his England card, Shearer started it Terry is his mentor, = look a ref in the eye and dare them to say anything. Jose will be there to take the story away as he has done for years.

[Original Dub]

They had a good rant about jose, cahill etc. on soccer saturday earlier.

They also launched into how we can't let the game go back the way it was, when baconface had all the officials running scared and intimidated.

Why the fuck didn't they point it out when he was still in charge?

Because they also were fucking scared. Cunts.

Anyway, at least it's now being admitted in the media.

And it should put more pressure on jose rather than the opposite

[london blue 2]

They had a good rant about jose, cahill etc. on soccer saturday earlier.

They also launched into how we can't let the game go back the way it was, when baconface had all the officials running scared and intimidated.

Why the fuck didn't they point it out when he was still in charge?

Because they also were fucking scared. Cunts.

Anyway, at least it's now being admitted in the media.

And it should put more pressure on jose rather than the opposite

Thing is THEY are the ones that should be calling bullshit on his comments!

[Original Dub]

In fairness, they were calling total bullshit on his comments.

Saying he was deflecting attention away from his players' dodgy incidents.

They were also saying the press liked him last time round because he was "entertaining" and cheeky, where as he is starting to annoy everyone this time.

He could be running himself into a dead end either way and it would be a fabulous trilogy of recent title wins to pip them and have him packing his bags all in one go.

[Ted Hughes]

In fairness, they were calling total bullshit on his comments.

Saying he was deflecting attention away from his players' dodgy incidents.

They were also saying the press liked him last time round because he was "entertaining" and cheeky, where as he is starting to annoy everyone this time.

He could be running himself into a dead end either way and it would be a fabulous trilogy of recent title wins to pip them and have him packing his bags all in one go.

It was a two way wankoff with Mourinho & the interviewers after that game. He was desperate to talk about the ref but wanted to pretend he was unable to do so. The reporters were desperate for him to slag off the ref. So the theme was: " you feel uhappy about some of the incidents in that game ?"
"what do you mean ?"
"the penalty incident"
"so you thought it was a penalty ?"
"I'm asking you"
"I don't want to get into trouble, you must have thought it was a penalty ?" etc etc etc

But nobody asked him: "do you feel Cahill was lucky to stay on the pitch ?"

If they are serious about not wanting a return to Ferguson days, then they should stop their interviewers from basically setting up the interview so he can get exactly what he wants out of it. Make him answer a few difficult questions.

The day all this sycophancy would finish, dead, is the day he became manager of City. If he was our manager, they would be fucking hounding him.

Why Cahill is allowed to boot somebody in front of the ref would be a good question for the next presser, & quite a fair & pertinent question seeing as he has claimed a conspiracy against his team. Nobody will ask it.

[blues2win]

Agreed Ted but how could Phil Dowd justify both saying he saw the incident( exempting Cahill from retrospective action) and that he didn't give Cahill a straight red? No inquest, no playing of video in loop and no question put to a former referee asking what he thought. Sky's behaviour was shocking too.

[Ted Hughes]

Agreed Ted but how could Phil Dowd justify both saying he saw the incident( exempting Cahill from retrospective action) and that he didn't give Cahill a straight red? No inquest, no playing of video in loop and no question put to a former referee asking what he thought. Sky's behaviour was shocking too.

Go back two years, swap Cahill for Mario; Sky & the rest go apeshit, Dowd suddenly announces he didn't see it, Mario gets retrospective 3 game ban.

It stinks.

[DoomMerchant]

Agreed Ted but how could Phil Dowd justify both saying he saw the incident( exempting Cahill from retrospective action) and that he didn't give Cahill a straight red? No inquest, no playing of video in loop and no question put to a former referee asking what he thought. Sky's behaviour was shocking too.

Go back two years, swap Cahill for Mario; Sky & the rest go apeshit, Dowd suddenly announces he didn't see it, Mario gets retrospective 3 game ban.

It stinks.

It was an absolutely disgusting display. My 9 year old said "hey...are you allowed to kick a player like that?"

No. No you are not.

Shitty.

Cheers

[Douglas Higginbottom]

The current situation is fascinating. Ref gives a red because he sees a situation and then it is overturned because somebody somewhere decides he made a mistake.

Alternatively the ref sees a situation ( allegedly) and doesn't give a red.Everybody knows he made a mistake and that would I assume include the actual ref and the "somebody somewhere" but the rules (allegedly) say the decision cannot be reversed if the ref says he saw it.( even if he didn't he only has to say he did).

Something wrong somewhere. Le Tiss said earlier he thought it came down to not punishing England players retrospectively.

[Blue Since 76]

I presume now booting players in the back is allowed, Routledge will get his red rescinded, as clearly that ref made a mistake...

Thought not.

[london blue 2]

In fairness, they were calling total bullshit on his comments.

Saying he was deflecting attention away from his players' dodgy incidents.

They were also saying the press liked him last time round because he was "entertaining" and cheeky, where as he is starting to annoy everyone this time.

He could be running himself into a dead end either way and it would be a fabulous trilogy of recent title wins to pip them and have him packing his bags all in one go.

That's all well and good but the people interviewing him are the ones that seem to be feeding him the oppotunity to chat his bollocks. Instead of telling him all teams have had bad decisions and asking him proper questions regarding his teams performance and not his made up agenda.

No mention of Cahill etc.

[Nick]

They had a good rant about jose, cahill etc. on soccer saturday earlier.

They also launched into how we can't let the game go back the way it was, when baconface had all the officials running scared and intimidated.

Why the fuck didn't they point it out when he was still in charge?

Because they also were fucking scared. Cunts.

Anyway, at least it's now being admitted in the media.

And it should put more pressure on jose rather than the opposite

only decent press i saw on the whole thing.

chelsea CONSISTENTLY get away with soft pens and defo reds almost every game. Almost every game cahill or/and Costa should be sent off for being dirty cunts. Its a joke. Then Jose tries to say the agenda is the other way?! Even my rag mates admit 'Chelsea are the new United'