Took at least 2 blatant nasty fouls for Ramsey to get his first yellow. So maybe he was trying to avoid sending someone off.
However doesn't excuse him bottling a penalty decision, nor having a very poor game.
The Referee Decisions Thread
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
- Status
Took at least 2 blatant nasty fouls for Ramsey to get his first yellow. So maybe he was trying to avoid sending someone off.
However doesn't excuse him bottling a penalty decision, nor having a very poor game.
The Ref had said before the game that he didn't want to be the star of the game. What that means and what we saw was that he wasn't going to give a red card or a penalty except in the most extreme circumstances. He basically decided to not do his job and hope that the football decides the match, but his abnegating his duty still ends up deciding the match anyway.
I don't think so Dominos. I think most people would accept it.
The media are that's why they harassed Dean and ever since he's screwed us over on decisions, just like many other refs who were called 'fans'. For all the ball we have at OT, we RARELY get penalties. It's a bit of a joke.
I remember away from home last season I think, and Dean gave a pen for smalling holding from a corner - something that happens every game! And Dean could have talked to them but looked to give the pen. Now that was a foul on Valencia and A penalty. And of course the linesman saw nothing. They only ever see something when it's against us 9/10. It's not rigged but I think United sadly pay because of their reputation and unlike what many suggest - we're continually screwed over more then any other big club in England - by cnuts.
It's not bias. It's a fact. We dominate most teams and get feck all from officials mostly. A penalty to us is like a warm fecking day in winter ....
Last edited:
This this and this again! Well put marjen!
Unsurprisingly this is an incredibly one eyed thread. I've only seen 4 or 5 of your games this season but I can cherry pick a few decisions that went your way to offer some balance:
- Bailly vs City in the Prem. On a yellow Bailly slid through the back of Otamendi in the box. Should have been a penalty at least and likely a second yellow (not 100% sure if that new double jeopardy rule would cover this?). Ref gives a goal kick.
- Bailly vs Chelsea. On a yellow Bailly clearly fouls Hazard off the ball in the box injuring himself in the process. Should have been a penalty and.... see above. Ref missed it completely.
- Herrera vs City in the EFL cup. Makes no attempt to play the ball and blocks Fernando (I think it was?) in the box in the run up to your goal. Ball rolled to Mata for the only goal of the game.
- Darmian vs Arsenal. Should have had a second yellow for his studs up challenge on Jenkinson. Yes the first yellow was soft however he'd already escaped a yellow early on when he hauled Theo down on the half-way line as Arsenal were breaking. That should have been his first yellow (tactical foul) but the ref let it go, seemingly realised his mistake (lino / 4th official in his ear?) and gave him a soft yellow for his next challenge.
Four incidents from four games that went in your favour.
The truth is you've dropped points for the same reasons every other team does - poor decision making, poor finishing, off days, tactically neutralised and sometimes because you're simply out-played (Chelsea alone this season from what I've seen).
Yes you dominated the majority of the game yesterday and yes, on the balance of play you deserved 3 points. However the Mata chance in the first half aside you didn't create any clear cut chances (obvs excluding your goal) and you allowed Arsenal a great chance with 2 minutes to go. That's why you dropped 2 points.
Redarding the penalty claim, as Giggs and company said at half time anywhere else on the pitch it's a foul (a phrase I'm sure you've all heard numerous times before, these types of decisions happen a lot in football). You won't be surprised to learn I think Valencia went down far too easily, especially for a man who's capable of running through brick walls unscathed.
Yes there was contact but then it's a contact sport (or at least used to be, most pundits don't seem to think this nowadays, looking at you Danny Murphy you pessimistic toad). Having said that, if the same occurred at the other end of the pitch I'd definitely be screaming my head off.
It's almost like our opinions of incidents are massively influenced by the teams we support.
Last edited:
Decisions have cost us major points this season, there is no disputing that fact. The rest of your post is just wrong or misguided. Arsenal, by your logic, could have had 2 or 3 players off the pitch if Damian's fouls were enough to be sent off.
As for the match against City and Chelsea, where yes, Bailly was fortunate, we lost both so we did not benefit from those decisions. Furthermore, Luiz and Bravo committed straight red offenses and went unpunished. Against Chelsea we still would have lost, but against City, we could have salvaged something. And who the heck cares about EFL?
This is not a fact, it's your opinion. There's a huge difference between facts and opinions. From the games I've seen what's cost you points is either a lack of clear cut chances or a failure to take them.
By my logic? The logic that if you're on a yellow and commit another foul you might get sent off? That's not logic, that's the rules of the game.
I agree on the Luiz and Bravo decisions but given they're specifically referenced in the OP I didn't see the point in mentioning them again. I think you've missed the point I was getting at. Yes you've had some decisions against you this season but you've also had some in your favour. Just like every other team in the league.
There's a naivety in thinking that if one or two decisions were different then the outcome would be in your favour. It's all hypothetical.
Blasphemy.
Edit - I'm not trying to rile people up on here, simply offer a bit of perspective. Though given the forum it's perhaps not too welcome.
The issue people have is with the inconsistencies and rightly so. Valencia should have had a penalty yesterday and Monreal would have been sent off. Swansea got one for exactly the same thing against Everton with Jagielka putting his arm across Sigurdson.
You are using an incredibly narrow lens of analysis, so truthfully you come across as a WUM. Your selectivity in referencing Damian yesterday but ignoring the rest of the match discredits what you are trying to argue .
United fans this season have issues with matches where decisions have cost us points, yet you reference matches which we lost anyway. As such, the decisions you reference did not benefit us, and did not cost the opposition points. Those are also games where game-changing decisions went against us, as you admit (City, Chelsea).
You may claim that we are not hard done by based on the very selective evidence you have provided, but the standard of refereeing we have been subjected to vs. a team like Arsenal this season (looking at the key decisions) has been appalling.
Would Monreal have been off? I honestly don't know how this new rule on penalties works. I thought Cech was going to be sent off against Sunderland a few weeks back but he only ended up with a yellow. In any case, as previously stated in the post you quoted if that happened to my team I'd have your line of thinking.
Is this thread about inconsistencies in reffing? Seems more about listing what certain people perceive as bad decisions that have cost you points (and according to one person your place at the top of the table). There's very little discussion around said inconsistencies. You have without doubt had some decisions go against you but you've also had some go for you. Like every other team.
Regarding Herrera in the EFL I know I'm in the minority on that one but I'm not the only one to think it. It's been mentioned on this forum alone a few times. And the Valencia line was a joke. Though people with the power of the juggernaut should have their own rules. The guy is barely human.
Don't forget the minimal contact with in the final minutes in that farce of a Southampton match where Arsenal were gifted all 3 points. Or the stonewalls denied to Leicester, or Burnley's robbery. I assume this guy is an Arsenal fan, so I don't blame him for defending referees. But to come on here claiming we should have no problems with the way our matches have been referred this season, especially after yesterday, is wumming at it's finest.
This is a thread about refs in the United forum so it's going to be discussing the decisions that effect United.
Think theres one in the football forum for everyone.
Didnt Fergie say referees decisions even out over a season. Darmian should of been sent off yesterday, but got away with it, although the yellow card was a bit harsh.
I love this line. Why should Darmian have been sent off? By that logic, Montreal, Sanchez and Coq would have walked. The decisions have not evened out for United this season (yet), and Marriner was atrocious yesterday.
Its not a fact.
My bad, I didn't realise oppo fans can't post in the United forum without being labelled WUM's. Lesson learnt.
I'm not defending refs, as mentioned way too many times already I was simply pointing out some decisions that have gone in your favour and seem to have been missed out from the OP. But then I think I've learnt why given this thread is less about sensible discussion and more about simple complaining.
I'm not defending refs, as mentioned way too many times already I was simply pointing out some decisions that have gone in your favour and seem to have been missed out from the OP. But then I think I've learnt why given this thread is less about sensible discussion and more about simple complaining.
No one said you can't post. I was simply explaining why this thread is geared towards decisions against United as you were complaining about it being one sided.
The tackle on Walcott was harsh however he got yellow carded. The tackle on Jenkinson was a bad one and a yellow card offence. He could of seen red. Im not a one eyed supporter who thinks Utd are hard done by and everyone else gets away scot free.
You admit the Walcott dive was a harsh yellow but think Darmian still should be sent off?
If you only reference Darmain, and ignore Sanchez, Monreal and Coq potential reds then that comes across as one-eyed.
Cop-out. Argue the points. All teams have decisions for and against them. We are talking about game-changing decisions such as penalties and reds, as well as a general lack of consistency (see Clattenburg). You reference decisions that were not game-changing and did not cost our lovely opponents points, games that we lost anyway.
I cannot think of any match where we gained points from a referee's decision. But I can think of several this season already where the referee has (likely) cost us points.
I hope these things swing in roundabouts. Then i can stop whinging.
Let's not forget Ramsey committed about 4 fouls himself in the second half before he eventually got booked.
No, let's relentlessly focus on Darmian and use that as a reason for Marriner having an excellent match, and proof that United are never hard done by
@Fridge chutney go on my son. Taking apart the opposition in here like a boss!
No your not reading what I put. The Darmian yellow card was harsh but the yellow card was given. The Jenkinson tackle should of been a yellow card, but we got lucky it wasnt awarded. If the referee hadnt of given the yellow card on the Walcott one he would of definitely given it then. Yes Arsenal should of had yellows as well and maybe red. My original point was things even out over a season, and we dont get treated unfairly overall. In fact most opposition fans reckon we get the best deal, especially during the Fergie era.
It's literally as if every challenge by a United player deserves a card but countless fouls from the oppo is fine.
This thread is titled "The referee decisions thread" and the OP states "Thought it might be good to start a thread, which can be updated throughout the season, that shows all decision for and against us. Feel free to remind me of decisions currently gone for and against us this season:"
I wasn't aware there was a qualifier to that statement regarding the result of the match. Had I been I wouldn't have waded in here and painted a target on my back.
Again, your opinion. And since that's your currency of choice here's another one for you - if you could put away a few more of your chances and cut out the mistakes at the back then you wouldn't be relying on someone with an almost impossible job having a perfect day at the office.
@TheReligion - I was referring to fridge with the WUM line, not yourself.
Edit - dammit, I'm out of posts for the day. This has been fun. Enjoy tearing my posts apart in my absence. Cheers!
The RAWK is strong in this thread.
"With competent officiating this season, we'd most likely be sitting top of the league."
Come on, at least try to see how biased this is.
"With competent officiating this season, we'd most likely be sitting top of the league."
Come on, at least try to see how biased this is.
Sure if you look hard enough you'll find something to balance out these referee/linesmen decisions, people said the same when Luiz got away without a red card as Herrera had done against Stoke weeks earlier. But 2 wrongs don't make a right in my book.
Officials can never please everybody and nobody expects them to be perfect. They will be the first port of call when fans don't want to look at the bigger picture and question managers/players. A decision made or not made by an official over a few seconds of a match shouldn't excuse the other 93 minutes 55 seconds a team has to earn a result.
Sky have a lot to answer for too, just for example yesterday, they had what 3? highly paid pundits and 1 host in the studio for the HT "show". With very few highlights to actually show at HT they focused in on an innocuous enough incident, I thought a stone wall pen 1st time I saw it but with each replay it looked less convincing agree with the verdict you'd get a free anywhere else on the pitch, although I feel Valencia wouldn't have gone down anywhere else on the pitch in honesty.
Well you're lucky, I couldn't post in the mains until I was a full member.
We are discussing game-changing decisions because those are the ones that influence matches. The occasional foul or corner will always be wrong, but what's the point of writing a thread about those? I still have yet to see game-changing decisions go in our favour, and have seen many game-changers go against us. You have not shown me otherwise and i retain my stance that the officials have been piss-poor this season with respect to many of our matches. And it is not an impossible job, I've seen it done well most of the time, so this season has honestly left me baffled.
Look at the galvanising effect those decisions have had for arsenal, they have gained 4-8 points as a result. To state that these decisions have cost us zero points is statistically probable at best.
My stance does not preclude me from understanding that we need to improve certain positions and elements of play. Once we are good enough, maybe the shite decisions won't hurt as much, until then we feel the pain.
there should be a referee league table thats released at the end of the season to the public.
We can agree then. I am of the opinion that decisions even out over a season, or 2, also. It hasn't yet, but statistically it should.
I await with glee for the media and rival meltdown when we get a jammily wrong pen/offside goal to gain an unfair 3 points in the future. Hopefully at the Etihad but I would take it at the Emirates or vs. Pool.
The RAWK is strong in this thread.
"With competent officiating this season, we'd most likely be sitting top of the league."
Come on, at least try to see how biased this is.
At least one person on here is probably itching to create an alternative league table a la RAWK with points adjusted based on refereeing decisions
Having said that, we've had some really poor decisions which have cost us enough points to be in and among the top 4. However, the same could be said for our finishing, defending, concentration, mentality etc. If the team were to play well enough consistently we'd be picking up three points more often than not despite poor refereeing decisions.
The RAWK is strong in this thread.
"With competent officiating this season, we'd most likely be sitting top of the league."
Come on, at least try to see how biased this is.
The state of some of the comments in this thread
Not following the thread so out of context here but that's not a foul imo. The ball was played across the 6 yard box and Herrera got in front/got positioning for it. Sure he didn't touch it or even try to (one pet hate of mine; if you're going to shield the ball/get positioning for it, then you've already 'won' the ball) but it wasn't a foul. Don't think it should have been a penalty and the ref didn't call it, so by letting the play go on, Herrera got what he 'deserved' there i.e got positioning but by not making contact, lost the ball = play goes on.
It was a good play because it led to a goal but if that had happened anywhere else on the pitch I'd be happy with the same outcome (as a neutral), impressed by his body positioning but annoyed at no attempt to control the ball and look for the foul.
I don't think we're getting any less from the refs now thanwe did in the Fergie era, the only difference is that back then we were winning most of these games anyway so we didn't care about refs mistakes as much as we do now.
Well that's my opinion at least.
Well that's my opinion at least.
I think you guys should stop complaining about the refs after every game. You manager is Jose Mourinho. He brings a package along with him which is no referee will ever give even 50-50 decisions to his side.
Stupid comments on the video aside, just shows how many points the refs have cost us already.
Why always us??
- Status