Because they know that EVERYONE knows it was a dive and therefore cheating. Whatever reputation the FA may have would have been wiped out if they had tried to deny it.
They cpould completley restore their reputation in my eyes if they gave us at least a point for the stoke game lol !!!!!
Pleasently surprized, Garry sailed close to the edge but didnt go over I guess.Very lucky and Im sure he will get an earfull for what he did "" wrong"".He went across my line though , very dissappointed in him , not the way I want us to precieved in the public eye.Im sure most will be high fiving though thinking he did norhing wrong because no further action was taken ..
The FA are absolutely spineless; they have not punished Gazza so that must mean that they don't believe that what he said was out of order! Will they punish Moses? Not a chance - they bang on about wanting to stop 'simulation' (diving to me and you) but don't possess the bollocks to see it through. They could stop diving tomorrow if they decided to hand out retrospective bans to players found guilty, but they won't do it because they don't want to set a dangerous precedent! If they punish a player from one of the 'lesser' teams, one day they may need to punish a player from one of the 'important' premier teams - and they really don't have the balls to make those important decisions! It's all well and groovy when it's little old Swansea in the spotlight, but if it was one of the top 4 then their sphincters would go into overdrive and they really don't have the bottle to deal with that situation! Garry is going to speak to Riley on Friday, and he will probably make all the right sounds, will say 'yes Garry, some of the decisions do seem unfair' and 'we will bear it in mind for the future' but when push comes to shove he will revert to type! The major decisions will once again go with the 'big' teams! Hope Fernandez's red card gets rescinded - it wasn't even a foul imo, but rescinding is the best we can expect - Riley and co are employed by the FA, and the bulk of the FA's money comes from the 'big' premier league teams - so who are they going to side with? This is the problem we will continue to face - we will always be little old Swansea in the eyes of the FA, and we will never be as important as the likes of the career 'victims' residing on Merseyside! So don't think referees will treat us any differently any time soon - Garry has put himself on the line and tried to put the spotlight on referees, and it is a noble tactic - make 'em think twice about persecuting little old Swansea! But don't think for a minute that the referees - employed by the FA - will do anything other than make decisions that will appease their masters who, of course, work for the FA! The Premier League is a wonderful place to be, but to believe we will be treated as equals is to be naive in the extreme!
Agree with the comments here. Nothing will change imo. I wasn't keen on Monk's appointment but whatever happens this season he's gone up in my estimation for his stance even if it proves fruitless.
I think Monk is a tad lucky to escape sanction. However, I don't think his statements have been in vain. He has not been sanctioned and therefore in the process has been able to mark out some territory. This will not go unnoticed amongst other clubs and match officials. How officials will respond to him and the team going forward will be interesting to watch. Going forward, because he has marked out his territory, he can stay on the safe side of the line but still make comments that carry some weight if not a little sting if said well. But he must stay "safe" and not abuse the situation or try to take liberties otherwise they'll **** him big time to snap him back in line. If we can get Fed's red card rescinded then this will also consolidate that territory.
Monk didn't criticise the referee but said what we all, true Jacks, wanted to say which was that a player cheated, dived, to gain advantage. In doing so the player conned a hapless referee into punishing us by giving a wrong decision which cost us points. All he said about the ref was that he was 'disappointed' with the referees decision, as we all were. Monk had nothing to answer for and should never have had to explain the obvious to the FA. There is or was no conjecture surrounding the incident, the player dived, that did happen, the fact is indisputable and proved by observation. You me and everyone watching the game saw it, so why did the FA call in Monk. Seems like the FA exist to manage and protect their image and not football.
No seems about it. This is one of their effective priorities whether they realize it, admit it or not.
As others have said, the lack of sanction appears to indicate that Monk has been allowed a 'fair comment' defence. Logic would therefore dictate that Moses must have dived (cheated). Can the FA sanction him even if they wanted to?
I can't see that they can , players have been charged after a game for incidents missed by the referee but a decision was made rightly or wrongly and the ref acted as he saw fit at the time .Monk in his opinion believed that Moses dived and although expressed it strongly well after the event the ref didn't so what Monk said was really of no consequence .It still good that it's been brought to the forfront of discussion but little will change I'm afraid especially when you have the likes of Martinez spouting the party line of it all evens out over a season , bollocks to that concept .
Mark Hughes is none too happy!............... Link:http://www.espn.co.uk/espn/sport/story/362709.html?CMP=OTC-RSS
