hunchy Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 He didn't do a great job but still needed more time. I wonder how well he would have done if given more time, and the money that has been spent this season. Also, Man Utd won the league partly because their rivals all had poor seasons. City, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool all improved last season. United have had the 'luxury' of no European football this season which makes their domestic efforts look even worse. Also wonder who was making his signings him or the chairman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 He didn't do a great job but still needed more time. I wonder how well he would have done if given more time, and the money that has been spent this season. Also, Man Utd won the league partly because their rivals all had poor seasons. City, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool all improved last season. United have had the 'luxury' of no European football this season which makes their domestic efforts look even worse. Man utd have spent most of the season in 3rd place, regardless of their win %age. That's an improvement and Moyes wouldn't have been sacked for that. The transfer operation under Moyes was pathetic (whether that was Moyes' fault or not we don't know). He spent weeks and weeks in a vain attempt to sign Fabregas, who was never going to go there. They then flip flopped and paid £7million more than they had to for Fellaini. Then brought in Mata, who while being an excellent player, was a £40 spend on something they didn't need. All the while the defence was the major area of need and was totally neglected. From the moment he was appointed he looked the wrong man for the job, I don't think more time would've changed that. For all its a cliche he'd never have played the "Man Utd way". His football is safety first and wouldn't have ever won titles IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishcumnock Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I got 11/1for a 2-1 arsenal c/s that is all . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I've not seen the offside shout, but from what I've read and heard about it, it sounds correct too. It wasn't. Rooney was definitely interfering with the 'keeper. It's mental that you've not even seen the incident yet are arguing that the officials called it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cove_Sheep Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) It wasn't. Rooney was definitely interfering with the 'keeper. It's mental that you've not even seen the incident yet are arguing that the officials called it right. Do you have a link to a clip as I was taking the fact it was correct from a podcast that talked through the incident and related them to the laws of the game? Guy doing the talking through is an assessor for the PGMO. Edited March 10, 2015 by Cove_Sheep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Do you have a link to a clip as I was taking the fact it was correct from a podcast that talked through the incident and related them to the laws of the game? Guy doing the talking through is an assessor for the PGMO. I'm sure it'll be on youtube (if it isn't then it couldn't have happened). From the laws of the game, rooney was in an offside position when the ball was played and interfered with an opponent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I'm sure it'll be on youtube (if it isn't then it couldn't have happened). From the laws of the game, rooney was in an offside position when the ball was played and interfered with an opponent. Just had a look at this. Have to say I don't think it's as clear cut as you are making out. Don't get me wrong I agree it should have been offside, I can just understand why it was given is what I mean. Can only think it's because Rooney wasn't impairing the 'keepers vision. He also visibly stops to try and moves to show he isn't interfering. Ref has possibly been influenced by that? Dive for the penalty IMO. Wtf is the keeper doing though. Idiot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Just had a look at this. Have to say I don't think it's as clear cut as you are making out. Don't get me wrong I agree it should have been offside, I can just understand why it was given is what I mean. Can only think it's because Rooney wasn't impairing the 'keepers vision. He also visibly stops to try and moves to show he isn't interfering. Ref has possibly been influenced by that? Dive for the penalty IMO. Wtf is the keeper doing though. Idiot! The keeper can't dive until he knows if Rooney is going to touch the ball. Rooney is quite clearly interfering with play and it was a disgraceful decision by the ref. There's no excuse for the official on that one.Rooney dived for the penalty but the ref was miles away and not sure what angle the linesman had, so can understand it was given. In this case Rooney cheated and managed to con the officials. He should have been retrospectively booked. I think it's all really clear and the current rules cover all of the circumstances. The ref was however just mince. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 The keeper can't dive until he knows if Rooney is going to touch the ball. Rooney is quite clearly interfering with play and it was a disgraceful decision by the ref. There's no excuse for the official on that one. Rooney dived for the penalty but the ref was miles away and not sure what angle the linesman had, so can understand it was given. In this case Rooney cheated and managed to con the officials. He should have been retrospectively booked. I think it's all really clear and the current rules cover all of the circumstances. The ref was however just mince. As I say not disputing that the decision was wrong but I can see why it was allowed to stand, based on my points above. When you see it back, you are right, the 'keeper is definitely put off by Rooney. I had to watch a couple of replays to see that though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 As I say not disputing that the decision was wrong but I can see why it was allowed to stand, based on my points above. When you see it back, you are right, the 'keeper is definitely put off by Rooney. I had to watch a couple of replays to see that though.I saw it at the time and knew straight away it shouldn't have stood. Admittedly that might have been wishful thinking on my part. I'm not a fan of man Utd or the Granny Sh@gger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I saw it at the time and knew straight away it shouldn't have stood. Admittedly that might have been wishful thinking on my part. I'm not a fan of man Utd or the Granny Sh@gger. Haha fair enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YORKIE PAM Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Absolutely spot on.In the days of Howard Webb as ref Mancs would have had about 3 penalties to help them out. Good to see those days are disappearing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.5eeaf0fbe501ba3c868c32fd77caef1f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.