howe's team seemingly on a spiral of ever decreasing circles v guardiola's resurgent CITY who we always do so well against. get in, can't wait for this one! :

[Toonpack 15512]

Just now, Renton said:

I personally love a bit of logical thought.

 

 

Planet killing AI whore 😘

[Renton 27739]

Just now, Toonpack said:

 

Planet killing AI whore 😘

 

Ooooh, I've driven the equivalent of 50 yards. Anyway, we all know it's emojis that are really killing the planet...  👍

[Toonpack 15512]

Just now, Renton said:

 

Ooooh, I've driven the equivalent of 50 yards. Anyway, we all know it's emojis that are really killing the planet...  👍

Straw/camels back

[Renton 27739]

1 minute ago, Toonpack said:

Straw/camels back

 

When that happens I hope it's due to an insulting viral Isak meme.

 

[ewerk 39128]

12 minutes ago, t00nraider2 said:

If this happened outside the box it would have been a foul, non? 

And if your mam had been your sister then… oh wait.

[Renton 27739]

Just now, ewerk said:

And if your mam had been your sister then… oh wait.

 

Now you're accusing him of being a mackem? Steady on there Irish. 

[Dr Gloom 26309]

42 minutes ago, Toonpack said:

 

But knowing the rule, why ?? If it was standing leg fine, but making contact with the foot that's following though after a shot nope, an argument could be made he kicked Scharr.

 

I know I'm being a tad facetious but the rule was (amazingly) correctly applied so I see no grounds for angst.

because the rule is stupid and it’s a free kick anywhere else on the pitch. Schar is late and leaves his studs on his Foden’s foot

[GrahamTaylor5 1781]

1 hour ago, wykikitoon said:

'Harvey Barnes could have scored one or two'

 

Errrrrr

 

 

That is as far as I got in and thought, I may have given this too much time 

[Toonpack 15512]

19 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

because the rule is stupid and it’s a free kick anywhere else on the pitch. Schar is late and leaves his studs on his Foden’s foot

 But it's the rule, stupid or not, all else is utterly irrelevant.

[Gemmill 62981]

 alright man. You....... win???! 

 

[Renton 27739]

No, we win!

[Howmanheyman 43814]

On 23/11/2025 at 14:36, t00nraider2 said:

If this happened outside the box it would have been a foul, non? 

 

 

 

🎶He's a man with no plan

Got a counterfeit idea in his head 

He's Misstra Know-fuck-All🎵

Edited December 1 by Howmanheyman

[AgentAxeman 584]

2 hours ago, Dr Gloom said:

because the rule is stupid and it’s a free kick anywhere else on the pitch. Schar is late and leaves his studs on his Foden’s foot

Na, Foden kicked the bottom of Schar's foot. 😏

[RobinRobin 14485]

14 hours ago, t00nraider2 said:

If this happened outside the box it would have been a foul, non? 

[trainman 165]

On 22/11/2025 at 17:50, Howmanheyman said:

Gets his shot off before tackled, never a penalty.

 

Before being fouled, and that is totally irrelevant, a late challenge and foul is still a foul anywhere on the pitch, should have been at least a yellow and stonewall pen.

[Howmanheyman 43814]

Just now, trainman said:

 

Before being fouled, and that is totally irrelevant, a late challenge and foul is still a foul anywhere on the pitch, should have been at least a yellow and stonewall pen.

 

I can see why they didn't give it but wouldn't have been surprised if they had. Saw something very similar in the Milan derby and the ref gives it which shows it depends how the ref is seeing things on a particular match day. I've no doubt whatsoever that's given v Liverpool. I think what saves us is that the ref doesn't see the slow motion of Fab's foot which makes it look more deliberately dangerous when he's just diving in to block the shot but is too far away to block it. Once the ref doesn't give it in real time as Foden gets his shot away they're not overturning the onfield decision, ref gives it and they won't overturn it either as either decision wouldn't have been a clear and obvious error but I'm black and white and you're a blue so maybe we're never agreeing on it. We got away with it because on another day the ref might have given an onfield pen and VAR aren't going to argue the toss.

[trainman 165]

On 22/11/2025 at 19:02, GrahamTaylor5 said:

I am pleased. I am pleased. Not sure how on earth he was onside. 

He wasn't. Here is the reality, and the arsenal- designed cartoon that var chose to create...

[Gemmill 62981]

MAN CITY PROPAGANDA! 

[ewerk 39128]

15 minutes ago, trainman said:

 

Before being fouled, and that is totally irrelevant, a late challenge and foul is still a foul anywhere on the pitch, should have been at least a yellow and stonewall pen.

 

 

For me it should have been a penalty but according to the letter of the law the contact was 'inevitable' and therefore not a foul. The only way a penalty could have been given was if the referee judged it to be reckless and that's a subjective call. Personally I'd say that both feet off the ground and studs up was reckless and we got away with one.

[OTF 10528]

Yeah that's lucky.

 

Our second goal though was onside despite it not looking it first glance and that's what has been most intensely discussed in the aftermath of the game.

 

If Barnes didn't score our second I'd have wanted a penalty for the foul/shove

on Bruno by Gvardiol whilst he headed the ball. Dias is apparently upset about something Barnes did to Donnarumma from the preceding corner, though I've rematches it and couldn't see anything.

[OTF 10528]

9 minutes ago, trainman said:

He wasn't. Here is the reality, and the arsenal- designed cartoon that var chose to create...

 

The bitter fan drawn image that I'm sure took longer than it should have through the tears, has not got the line drawn in the right place up to the outside of Dias' shoulder/upper arm as that area has not been a handball for years even with the arm extended/away from the body.

 

 

The computer generated graphic accounts for the actual rules which is why it correctly shows Bruno is onside. I think it's Dias doing some sort of skipping hop jump with his arm out that gets us across the line (well actually it gets us behind the line), so thanks Ruben.

[trainman 165]

24 minutes ago, OTF said:

 

The bitter fan drawn image that I'm sure took longer than it should have through the tears, has not got the line drawn in the right place up to the outside of Dias' shoulder/upper arm as that area has not been a handball for years even with the arm extended/away from the body.

 

 

The computer generated graphic accounts for the actual rules which is why it correctly shows Bruno is onside. I think it's Dias doing some sort of skipping hop jump with his arm out that gets us across the line (well actually it gets us behind the line), so thanks Ruben.

But he doesn't does he, at the point at which the ball is headed? as seen in the still of the action, he is still on the ground and the arm is clearly further from the line than bruno's foot.

Not bitter, just fed up of the way var can manipulate any outcome, even if I would expect it to occur against the red cartel rather than you lot (although arse obviously benefit)

[PaddockLad 22422]

2 minutes ago, trainman said:

But he doesn't does he, at the point at which the ball is headed? as seen in the still of the action, he is still on the ground and the arm is clearly further from the line than bruno's foot.

Not bitter, just fed up of the way var can manipulate any outcome, even if I would expect it to occur against the red cartel rather than you lot (although arse obviously benefit)

 

You had enough chances to have been 3/4 up by then though. It's on Haaland and to a lesser extent Foden as to why you didn't take all three points tbh 

[strawb 5407]

Deffo not bitter, whinging on another teams message board. No not at all

[Toonpack 15512]

3 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

 

You had enough chances to have been 3/4 up by then though. It's on Haaland and to a lesser extent Foden as to why you didn't take all three points tbh 

 

As we could have as well tbh.