Is Diego Costa the biggest cheat in the world?

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:It's the right decision regardless, although the kick out was a bookable offence he shouldn't have been booked before that.

Costa however should have been booked after 2 minutes

https://streamable.com/86xp

The guy is just such an all around piece of shit

a face not even a mother could love .

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:It's the right decision regardless, although the kick out was a bookable offence he shouldn't have been booked before that.

Costa however should have been booked after 2 minutes

https://streamable.com/86xp

The guy is just such an all around piece of shit

He also committed at least two yellow card offences which i can remember after the red card lol.

Good. WOuld have been a massive farce if he got away with it.

The Blues made known their feelings over the Football Association's decision to ban their striker for three games, but will wait for the written reasons before commenting further
Chelsea say they are "extremely disappointed" with the Football Association's decision to ban striker Deigo Costa for three matches on Tuesday.

Costa was suspended for his actions during the Blues' 2-0 victory over Arsenal on Saturday, in which he clashed with Laurent Koscielny and Gabriel.

A statement on the club's website reads: "We are extremely disappointed with the FA Regulatory Commission's decision to suspend Diego Costa. We will await their written reasons before commenting further."

Blues boss Jose Mourinho had lauded his striker's behaviour after the match, insisting he did nothing wrong and that he did not deserve to be red carded, as Gunners manager Arsene Wenger had suggested.

"If you want to speak about Diego Costa with me, he played like he has to play," he said.

"That's why you have full stadiums and the game watched around the world by millions and millions. The game has to be played like that.

"That is why tomorrow I will go to see what I consider comparable in terms of dedication and passion, New Zealand and Argentina [in the Rugby World Cup] - I go tomorrow because I love it. Fantastic, Diego.

"Costa was man-of-the-match for me. Of course [it was not a red card for Costa]."

The FA had earlier rescinded Gabriel's own three-match punishment after he was sent off during the game for kicking out at Costa.

The Gunners appealed against the would-be violent conduct ban on the grounds of wrongful dismissal, and were deemed successful.

However, the Brazilian centre-back still faces an improper conduct charge and has until Thursday evening to respond.

Costa banned for 3 games. Mou be like

cant wait to see what the real cnut of the footballing world has to say about it.

Would love to fight him tbh

Lex wrote:Would love to fight him tbh

Retrospective action?

https://gfycat.com/SinfulJitteryImperatorangel

Respect for Skrtel for keeping his cool. Costa should be banned for life for his lifetime achievements

Don't call me James wrote:Retrospective action?

https://gfycat.com/SinfulJitteryImperatorangel

Is this guy insane or something???

I dont think FA would take any action against it but they should imo.

Helmer wrote:I dont think FA would take any action against it but they should imo.

Depends whether the referee has seen it in the game or not.

Apparently he gave a foul for the incident so he judged the whole action in the game (probably didn't see the kick the way replays show it but then that's the same with any other foul that can't be appealed).

Retroactive action can only be taken for things happening out of the refs sight.

Skrtel provoked him throughout the match, dirty freaking player. Infamous for his acts.

There should be no retrospective action, won't be surprised if there is though.

I think he gave foul for initial mis judged tackle by Costa. But after going to to ground, Clattenburg was looking away for a moment and then realised they are still lying on the ground. So I think Clattenburg would definitely inform FA, he didnt see it in real time.

Blue wrote:Skrtel provoked him throughout the match, dirty freaking player. Infamous for his acts.

There should be no retrospective action, won't be surprised if there is though.

here comes the thing 'Chleseas players and managers are saints, while others are pricks' Skrtel and Costa both are physical players but the difference is Costa crosses the line. If you open your eyes little wider, Costa kicked him and Skrtel gave him his hand

Helmer wrote:I think he gave foul for initial mis judged tackle by Costa. But after going to to ground, Clattenburg was looking away for a moment and then realised they are still lying on the ground. So I think Clattenburg would definitely inform FA, he didnt see it in real time.

In the gif you posted Clappenstein is standing right there and looking on to it the whole time.
Should have been a red card no doubt but in this case retroaction is not possible.

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Helmer wrote:I think he gave foul for initial mis judged tackle by Costa. But after going to to ground, Clattenburg was looking away for a moment and then realised they are still lying on the ground. So I think Clattenburg would definitely inform FA, he didnt see it in real time.

In the gif you posted Clappenstein is standing right there and looking on to it the whole time.
Should have been a red card no doubt but in this case retroaction is not possible.

Ok, may be ! Not that I care anymore but if the rules say so, fair enough ! The chapter closed then !

Helmer wrote:

Blue wrote:Skrtel provoked him throughout the match, dirty freaking player. Infamous for his acts.

There should be no retrospective action, won't be surprised if there is though.

here comes the thing 'Chleseas players and managers are saints, while others are pricks' Skrtel and Costa both are physical players but the difference is Costa crosses the line. If you open your eyes little wider, Costa kicked him and Skrtel gave him his hand

1. I have not stated Costa or our manager is a saint, you are making a false assumption about my views.

2. I feel Skrtel actions toggles and actions throughout the match does not make him a saint either. Let's not act like his kick was an intention to hurt, but more of a way to provoke Skrtel tbf.

Blue wrote:Skrtel provoked him throughout the match, dirty freaking player. Infamous for his acts.

There should be no retrospective action, won't be surprised if there is though.

How is Skrtel infamous for his acts?


But Clattenburg saw the whole thing so there shouldn't be action. It was a deliberate kick and a red, but oh well.

Helmer wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Helmer wrote:I think he gave foul for initial mis judged tackle by Costa. But after going to to ground, Clattenburg was looking away for a moment and then realised they are still lying on the ground. So I think Clattenburg would definitely inform FA, he didnt see it in real time.

In the gif you posted Clappenstein is standing right there and looking on to it the whole time.
Should have been a red card no doubt but in this case retroaction is not possible.

Ok, may be ! Not that I care anymore but if the rules say so, fair enough ! The chapter closed then !

at least that's the way I see it.

Blue wrote:

Helmer wrote:

Blue wrote:Skrtel provoked him throughout the match, dirty freaking player. Infamous for his acts.

There should be no retrospective action, won't be surprised if there is though.

here comes the thing 'Chleseas players and managers are saints, while others are pricks' Skrtel and Costa both are physical players but the difference is Costa crosses the line. If you open your eyes little wider, Costa kicked him and Skrtel gave him his hand

1. I have not stated Costa or our manager is a saint, you are making a false assumption about my views.

2. I feel Skrtel actions toggles and actions throughout the match does not make him a saint either. Let's not act like his kick was an intention to hurt, but more of a way to provoke Skrtel tbf.

Ohhh, ok so Suarez's bite was just a result of getting provoked by Ivanovic or other Chelsea players. No it was not, the reason is that this is how Suarez's frustrated nature was and he had crossed the line. In the footballing world, it is all about football and the physicality allowed which does not harm your opponents.

I also dont think Costa wanted to hurt Skrtel but he was wound up by Skrtel and in general the situation in the match. Costa was frsutrated and he took it out on Skrtel. As a grown up, you can/should not do it !

Helmer wrote:

Blue wrote:

Helmer wrote:
here comes the thing 'Chleseas players and managers are saints, while others are pricks' Skrtel and Costa both are physical players but the difference is Costa crosses the line. If you open your eyes little wider, Costa kicked him and Skrtel gave him his hand

1. I have not stated Costa or our manager is a saint, you are making a false assumption about my views.

2. I feel Skrtel actions toggles and actions throughout the match does not make him a saint either. Let's not act like his kick was an intention to hurt, but more of a way to provoke Skrtel tbf.

Ohhh, ok so Suarez's bite was just a result of getting provoked by Ivanovic or other Chelsea players. No it was not, the reason is that this is how Suarez's frustrated nature was and he had crossed the line. In the footballing world, it is all about football and the physicality allowed which does not harm your opponents.

I also dont think Costa wanted to hurt Skrtel but he was wound up by Skrtel and in general the situation in the match. Costa was frsutrated and he took it out on Skrtel. As a grown up, you can/should not do it !

I agree on the Costa part, I feel Costa does a lot of stupid childish shit, but I don't think retroactive action is needed.

If Costa act was more harmful or intentional to injure then my perspective would change.

Could get a 4 match ban by FA.

Chelsea are probably better with Remy atm

But he won't get a punishment since liverpool aren't raising a case and no one else really cares